Connecticut Pursues Greater Interest, Upholds Protection of Reporting Officers
by
Joseph C. Maya on Mar. 29, 2017
Employment Employment Sexual Harassment
Summary: Blog post on Connecticut's efforts to protect police officers who report other officers for sexual harassment.
Contact the experienced employment law attorneys at Maya Murphy, P.C. today at (203) 221-3100 or JMaya@Mayalaw.com.
In the case of Rioux v. Barry, a police lieutenant appealed a judgment by the Superior Court in the Judicial District of New Haven, Connecticut. The lower court had granted a police officer’s motion to dismiss the Lieutenant’s claim. The lieutenant claimed that the trial court improperly determined that the officers were entitled to absolute immunity against his claims for vexatious litigation and intentional interference with contractual or beneficial relations.
After the police lieutenant was assigned to be the commanding officer of a troop barracks, he instituted many reforms regarding officer management and personnel evaluation. The lieutenant alleged that the police officers resented the tighter discipline imposed upon them by the reforms and conspired to "get rid" of him. In response to a survey, one of the officers claimed that the lieutenant had engaged in conduct that constituted sexual harassment that was corroborated by other officers, which resulted in the lieutenant's suspension. When the suspension was later overturned, the lieutenant sued the officers for vexatious litigation and intentional interference with contractual or beneficial relations. The state supreme court found that the elements of the tort of vexatious litigation utilized a balancing test that effectively protected the interests of both the lieutenant and the other officers. While immunity would not insulate officers for false claims, the court found it necessary to attach some immunity for the protection of officers that look to report malicious behavior such as sexual harassment.
The judgment was affirmed as to the claim for intentional interference with contractual or beneficial relations, it was reversed as to the claim for vexatious litigation, and the case was remanded for further proceedings on that claim. “[The court’s decision utilized] a balancing test that effectively protects the interests of both [officers] and [Leiutenant] charged in complaints, and properly ensures that complaining witnesses who bring claims in good faith will be insulated from suit” explained the court. “Accordingly, the tort of vexatious litigation effectuates the federal and state policy of providing workplaces that are free from sexual harassment.”
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.
For continuous access to the legal world, follow us on Twitter and LinkedIn. We offer the latest updates on caselaw and legal news. In addition, informational videos are available for your convenience on our YouTube channel.
Source: Rioux v. Barry, 283 Conn. 338, 927 A.2d 304, 2007 Conn. LEXIS 301, 26 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 625 (Conn. 2007)
