DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Section 31-51q

Citation
Section 31-51q
Parent Document
Cotto v. United Technologies Corp., 251 Conn. 1 (1999)
Jurisdiction
Connecticut (state)
Effective Date
1999-10-12
Original Source
https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/7898264/cotto-v-united-technologies-corp/ ↗

Other Sections in This Document (143)

Full Text

614 chars 
*25The concurring opinion of Judge Hennessy took a narrower view of the statute. In his view, § 31-51qsimply did not apply to the facts alleged by the plaintiff because “the statute applies only to violations of constitutional rights.” Id., 634 (Hennessy, J., concurring). Judge Hennessy reasoned that because both the first amendment and article first apply only to the acts of the state, and not to the acts of private persons; id., 632; and because the speech, having occurred on private property, was not protected by either constitutional provision, the statute did not apply to the present case. Id., 633-34.