Contact the experienced employment law attorneys at Maya Murphy, P.C. today at (203) 221-3100 or JMaya@Mayalaw.com. 

In the case of Baker v. Hawthorne, Inc., an employee filed suit against an employer and its president, alleging age and sex discrimination, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The employer and president moved to strike the negligent infliction of emotional distress and intentional infliction of emotional distress counts and the age and sex discrimination counts against the president. In order to prevail on a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress, the employee must prove that: (1) that the employer and/or president intended to inflict emotional distress or that he knew or should have known that emotional distress was the likely result of his conduct; (2) that the conduct was extreme and outrageous; (3) that the conduct was the cause of the employee’s distress; and (4) that the emotional distress sustained by the employee was severe. Whether such conduct is sufficient to satisfy the requirement that it be extreme and outrageous is initially a question for the court to determine.

The trial court noted that the employee did not object to the negligent infliction of emotional distress counts being stricken. The employee alleged that the employer reduced her work hours due to her age and sex, and that she was subjected to derogatory and discriminatory remarks. While discrimination in employment on the basis of age and sex was intolerable and illegal, and employer and president’s alleged conduct might be objectionable, the employee failed to allege any conduct that was extreme or outrageous. The intentional infliction of emotional distress counts were stricken. An individual employee could not be held liable for an employer's alleged discriminatory practices.  As an individual and not an employer, the president could not be held liable for the employer's alleged discriminatory conduct because the statute did not provide for individual liability. Since the president could not be held individually liable under the statute, the age and sex discrimination counts against her failed to state a legally sufficient cause of action under Connecticut law.

The motion to strike was granted. “As an individual and not an employer, the [president] cannot be held liable for the Hawthorne Inn's alleged discriminatory conduct under Connecticut law, because, as established in [prior case law],  the statute does not provide for individual liability” said the court. “Since [the president] cannot be held individually liable under the statute, counts five and six fail to state a legally sufficient cause of action under [Connecticut law].” 

If you feel you have been mistreated by your employer or in your place of employment and would like to explore your employment law options, contact the experienced employment law attorneys today at 203-221-3100, or by email at JMaya@mayalaw.com. We have the experience and knowledge you need at this critical juncture. We serve clients in both New York and Connecticut including New Canaan, Bridgeport, White Plains, and Darien.

Source: Baker v. Hawthorne Inn, Inc., 2010 Conn. Super. LEXIS 818, 2010 WL 1817808 (Conn. Super. Ct. Apr. 6, 2010)