Legal Articles, Employment
What Must an Employer Do to Accommodate an Employee or Job Applicant Who Has a Disability in Connecticut?
What Must an Employer Do to Accommodate an Employee or Job Applicant Who Has a Disability in Connecticut?
Hostile Work Environment vs. Quid Pro Quo Sexual Harassment
As an employment law attorney I can get too accustomed to the legal jargon. One question frequently asked by prospective clients is “what is the difference between hostile work environment and quid pro quo sexual harassment?” While both types of employment discrimination are illegal and actionable, they can take very different forms.
Mere Inclusion of a Restrictive Covenant Does Not Invalidate Entire Contract
Wes-Garde Components Group, Inc. v. Carling Technologies, Inc., 2012 Conn. Super. LEXIS 899
Court Enforces Non-Compete Agreements Connected to Franchise Agreements
Carvel Corporation v. DePaola, 2001 Conn. Super. LEXIS 1190
Enforcement of a Non-Compete
The trip-wire for the enforcement of a restrictive covenant is a breach by a former employee of contractual provisions contained in the agreement. An employer is entitled to relief if a former employee is engaging, or threatening to engage, in activities expressly prohibited by a non-compete agreement, that would cause harm to the employer. A former employee’s violation of a non-compete agreement constitutes a breach and “dictate[s] that the plaintiff is entitled to enforce the agreement.”
An employer may also be entitled to relief where the former employee has not yet breached the agreement but is threatening to do so. Under these circumstances, the former employer may be entitled to injunctive relief from the court restraining any breach irrespective of the potential damage.
NLRA’s Employee Rights No Longer Required to be Posted by Employers
You’ve seen the poster right? You know, the large laminated red, white and blue posters filled with size 8 font of your employee rights and posted near lunch areas or the bathrooms? Well, employers are no longer required to post those for their employee’s benefit according to a new Federal Court Holding.
CT Calls for Broader Initial Disclosures
All of the judges in the District of Connecticut are now using Initial Discovery Protocols in most non-class action employment cases. In applicable cases, the Initial Discovery Protocols supersede parties’ initial disclosure obligations under Rule 26(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Both the plaintiff and the defendant must respond to the Initial Discovery Protocols within 30 days after the defendant has submitted a responsive pleading or motion, unless the court rules otherwise.
Applying Basic Contract Principles to the Enforcement of a Non-Compete Agreement
North American Outdoor Products, Inc. v. Dawson, 2004 Conn. Super. LEXIS 2677
Does Termination of Employment Effect My Non-Compete?
Does Termination of Employment Effect My Non-Compete?
Breach of Non-Compete in Connecticut Insurance Firm
CUNA Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Butler, 2007 Conn. Super. LEXIS 1623