Page 34 - CLT032221

34 ¦ MARCH 22, 2021 CONNECTICUT OPINIONS

SUPREME COURT injunctive relief. The court concluded that, al-
though there was sufficient evidence for the jury
DAMAGES to find defendants liable, the trial court failed
to properly instruct the jury regarding the legal
Trial Court Failed to Properly Instruct effects of the parties’ contract and the proper
Jury on Legal Effects of Parties’ means of calculating damages. As a result, the
court reversed the judgment of the trial court
and remanded the case for a new trial.

Contract and Proper Means of DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Calculating Damages
CASE: Kent Literary Club of Wesleyan Univ. at Middletown City of New Haven Failed to Show That
v. Wesleyan Univ. Union Member’s Reinstatement to Her
COURT: Connecticut Supreme Court Employment Violated Public Policy
DOC. NO.: SC 20226
COURT OPINION BY: Palmer
DATE: March 05, 2021 • PAGES: 35 CASE: City of New Haven v. AFSCME, Council 4, Local 3144
COURT: Connecticut Supreme Court
This appeal involved a commercial dispute DOC. NO.: SC 20362
arising in the unique context of an under- COURT OPINION BY: Keller
graduate housing program at Wesleyan Uni- DATE: March 04, 2021 • PAGES: 24
versity. A jury found in plaintiffs’ favor in the
Plaintiff City of New Haven appealed from the
underlying action, brought to recover damages judgment of the trial court granting the applica-
for defendants’ alleged violation of the Con- tion of defendant union to confirm an arbitra-
necticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, and for tion award reinstating the grievant, Nichole Jef-
other relief. The court later denied defendants’ ferson, a member of the union, to her employ-
motions for a directed verdict and to set aside ment as executive director of the city’s Com-
the verdict, issued an injunction requiring de- mission on Equal Opportunities and denying
fendants to enter into a certain agreement with the city’s corresponding application to vacate
plaintiffs, and rendered judgment for plaintiffs, the award on public policy grounds. On appeal,
from which defendants appealed. On appeal, the city claimed that the trial court incorrectly
defendants raised various challenges to the determined that the award did not violate pub-
judgment, including claims concerning the trial lic policy.The Connecticut Supreme Court dis-
court’s jury instructions and the sufficiency of agreed and affirmed, concluding that the city
the evidence with respect to both liability and failed to meet its burden of demonstrating that
damages. Defendants also contended that the Jefferson’s reinstatement violated public policy.
trial court abused its discretion or otherwise “If an employer wishes to preserve the right to
acted contrary to law in awarding plaintiffs discharge employees guilty of misconduct such

CONNECTICUT
Law Tribune