214 results for 'court:"USDC Connecticut"'.
J. Garcia denies all parties' motions for summary judgment, ruling the bus drivers' cited evidence fails to establish all necessary elements for their retaliation and discrimination claims and, therefore, precludes judgment in their favor. Meanwhile, the drivers' claims regarding the employer's failure to properly sanitize buses or use hypoallergenic sanitizers in the wake of Covid-19 are not preempted by the National Transit Systems Security Act because the complaint filed with OSHA before this suit was filed was dismissed by the agency.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Garcia, Filed On: May 3, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv217, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Evidence, Preemption, Employment Retaliation
J. Shea grants the employer's motion to compel arbitration, ruling the contract at issue in this case is between two business entities and, therefore, is not covered by any exemption to the Federal Arbitration Act, including the exemption involving workers engaged in interstate commerce, such as the delivery drivers who brought the suit. Additionally, the fee-shifting provision of the arbitration clause does not render it unconscionable because the drivers have not shown arbitration costs would be prohibitive, while the bold and large type on the contract negates any argument the agreement was deceptive.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Shea, Filed On: May 2, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv1695, NOS: Other Labor Litigation - Labor, Categories: Arbitration, Employment, Labor
J. Oliver grants the employer's motion to dismiss, ruling the employee failed to establish a prima facie case for either disparate treatment or hostile work environment. She did not suffer an adverse employment action, but rather resigned of her own accord. The employee was not demoted or fired, and although she claims her resignation was a constructive discharge, the coworker who harassed her repeatedly was not working for the employer at the time and, therefore, she cannot satisfy pleading requirements.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Oliver, Filed On: April 30, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv1069, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, Evidence
J. Oliver grants FedEx's motion for summary judgment, ruling the employee's hostile work environment claims were filed outside the statute of limitations and, therefore, must be dismissed as untimely. Meanwhile, because the employee failed to cite any similarly situated employees as comparators for his age and race retaliation claims, those fail as a matter of law and the lawsuit will be dismissed in its entirety.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Oliver, Filed On: April 25, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv1472, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Procedure, Employment, Employment Discrimination
J. Oliver grants the hydration patch manufacturer's motion for summary judgment, ruling the patch developer's contract and fraud claims fail because it never made a purchase order under the parties' supply agreement that would have required the manufacturer to produce the patches, while the manufacturer also never signed the agreement, which renders it void.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Oliver, Filed On: April 23, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv618, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Evidence, Contract
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Oliver grants, in part, the insurer's motion to dismiss, ruling the union's fiduciary duty claims fail. The alleged increased rates charged by the insurer were determined by the parties' contractual agreements and involved no discretion on the part of the insurer.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Oliver, Filed On: April 22, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv1541, NOS: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) - Labor, Categories: Erisa, Fiduciary Duty, Labor / Unions
J. Nagala denies, in part, class counsel's motion for attorney fees, ruling the attorneys' request for an award of one-third of the total $4.1 million settlement amount is unreasonable when compared to other, similar class action ERISA lawsuits. Therefore, without any evidence to prove this case was extraordinary or unique in any way, the award will be reduced to one-quarter of the total settlement.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Nagala, Filed On: April 16, 2024, Case #: 3:21cv1085, NOS: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) - Labor, Categories: Attorney Fees, Class Action
J. Vatti denies the beauty products company's motion to compel, ruling that because it does not claim the products sold by the online retailer are counterfeit and the source of the products are irrelevant to any of its other claims under the Lanham Act, it is not entitled to an order requiring the retailer to disclose the source of the products sold on its website.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Vatti, Filed On: April 9, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv1038, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: Trademark, Discovery
J. Williams partially grants a fire department, its president and another member’s motion for summary judgment in this employment dispute brought by a couple that were former volunteer firefighters. The couple alleges unlawful expulsion, retaliation against the exercise of free speech, defamation, defamation per se and tortious interference with a beneficial relationship after the department suspended them for harassing and assaulted the other member. The couple attended hearings, but the bylaws did not allow them to attend the expulsion meeting held before they were able to submit additional evidence. The couple cannot establish that they were in fact employees, nor that they received any remuneration before the expulsion, or that they experienced an actual loss after the expulsion. The defamation and defamation per se claims are ready to proceed to trial, the president and member e-file a joint status report.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Williams, Filed On: April 1, 2024, Case #: 3:20cv1677, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Defamation
J. Williams grants, in part, the insurers motion to dismiss this multiplan agreement under ERISA dispute brought by three insured employees regarding their health benefits. The employees seek to recover health benefits the insurers withheld, equitable relief under ERISA violations and negligent misrepresentation, tortious interference with the patient-physician contract or relationship, proscribe insurers’ conduct under a promissory estoppel theory and a violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act. The employees are barred from equitable relief to recover health benefits at this stage, and fail to establish a standing for the multiplan agreement violations. The insurer Cigna is dismissed on all claims, and the others are dismissed from the negligent misrepresentation, tortious interference, promissory estoppel theory and Washington Consumer Protection Act claims. The court also grants the insurers motion to seal certain exhibits.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Williams, Filed On: March 30, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv769, NOS: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) - Labor, Categories: Erisa, Settlements, Interference With Contract
J. Chatigny finds that summary judgment is premature in a case in which detectives withheld exculpatory evidence in a criminal case that resulted in plaintiffs’ wrongful imprisonment. Plaintiffs’ claim rests on negligence of detectives and a narrow identifiable person imminent-harm exception to discretionary immunity. Evidence related to the exception must be further reviewed. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment denied in part and granted in part.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Chatigny, Filed On: March 29, 2024, Case #: 3:19cv388, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Evidence, Immunity
J. Dooley grants in part and denies in part a motion to dismiss filed by an employer who fired an employee two years after they urged her to return to work early from parental leave. The request for early return two years prior to termination does is not sufficient to infer gender-based discrimination or retaliation. However, the employee requested family medical leave to care for her son weeks prior to the termination date and this is cause for retaliation.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Dooley, Filed On: March 29, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv3, NOS: Family and Medical Leave Act - Labor, Categories: Employment, Employment Retaliation
J. Underhill finds that narcotics agents from the IRS Criminal Investigation Division did not violate the Fourth Amendment while conducting a search. The searched citizen is was connected to entities identified on the warrant, and the search was conducted in a professional manner, with no office employees present at the site of the search after 10 p.m. The judge grants the agent’s motion for summary judgment and denies motion by a business entity searched at the site.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Underhill, Filed On: March 29, 2024, Case #: 3:14cv741, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Corporations, Tax
[Consolidated.] J. Chatigny finds that summary judgment is premature in a case in which detectives withheld exculpatory evidence in a criminal case that resulted in plaintiffs’ wrongful imprisonment. Plaintiffs’ claim rests on negligence of detectives and a narrow “identifiable person imminent harm” exception to discretionary immunity. Evidence related to the exception must be further reviewed. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment denied in part and granted in part.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Chatigny, Filed On: March 29, 2024, Case #: 3:18cv1502, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, Immunity, Damages
J. Underhill grants in part and denies in part a motion for summary judgment in a case in which Bondsmen did not return a depositor’s funds. The case is timely, and statute of limitations claims by Bondsmen do not apply. The depositor’s claim of fraudulent misrepresentation is denied because the Bondsmen’s representation of legal issuance of the bonds is an issue of fact. The depositor’s motion for summary judgment is denied in part and granted in part.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Underhill, Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: 3:21cv221, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Fraud, Conversion, Contract
J. Meyer remands a case in which a resident filed a claim in state court against a railroad for blocking automobile traffic for excessive periods of time. The railroad removed the case to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction. The claim does not meet the $75,000 requirement for federal diversity jurisdiction, so the judge returns this case to state court.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Meyer, Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv990, NOS: Motor Vehicle - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Civil Procedure, Transportation, Jurisdiction
J. Nagala finds that pro se Chinese dissident’s claim against YouTube and Google, which demonetized his channel after the Chinese Communist Party allegedly hacked it, does not violate the terms of service agreement. The court converts to a motion for summary judgment.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Nagala, Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv513, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Communications, Contract, Technology
J. Dooley denies the firearm manufacturers' motion to dismiss for lack of standing, ruling that while the customers' Social Security numbers were not stolen in the data breach, the theft of credit card information - used to make several fraudulent purchases - is sufficient to establish a concrete injury and the threat of imminent harm. However, because the consumers' negligence claim is identical to the contract claim and does not cite any property damage sustained as a result of the manufacturer's negligence, that claim is barred by the economic loss doctrine and must be dismissed.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Dooley, Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv1233, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Consumer Law, Negligence, Class Action
J. Underhill grants Walmart's motion for summary judgment, ruling that although it had an easement and paid for maintenance expenses on the parking lot where the pothole was located, it was not the owner of the property and, therefore, cannot be held liable for the shopper's injuries.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Underhill, Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv408, NOS: Other Personal Injury - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Evidence, Premises Liability
J. Williams grants the trademark owner's motion to dismiss counterclaims filed by the infringing competitor, ruling its unfair competition and securities claims fail because there are no allegations of unlawful securities transactions and the claims also deal with the owner's actions in the Japanese market, which are outside the scope of the relevant statute.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Williams, Filed On: March 25, 2024, Case #: 3:20cv1056, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: Securities, Trademark, Jurisdiction
J. Williams denies the trademark owner's motion for sanctions, ruling the infringing company provided documents requested after its initial discovery responses were insufficient, while the owner provides no support for its claim the documents are unusable or not what it requested following the first round of discovery.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Williams, Filed On: March 25, 2024, Case #: 3:20cv1056, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: Sanctions, Trademark, Discovery