X hits on this document

30 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

9 / 14

is entitled to a judgment for the full amount of the relief claimed. The plaintiff must still

prove how much of the judgment prayed for in the complaint he is entitled to receive.”

(Internal quotation marks omitted.) Murray v. Taylor, supra, 65 Conn. App., 334, 335.

A.

Emotional Distress

As I have previously held in Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities ex rel.

DiMicco v. Neil Roberts, Inc., 2006 WL 4753466 (CHRO No. 0420438, September 12,

2006), the inclusion of a claim under General Statutes § 46a-58 (a) in the complaint

affidavit of an employment discrimination case, allows me to convert federal claims (as

were made here) into claims under Connecticut law, and to award damages for

emotional distress pursuant to General Statutes § 46a-86 (c). My finding in DiMicco (as

in the case before me now) was made in reliance on Commission on Human Rights &

Opportunities ex rel. Tina Saddler v. Margaret Landry dba Superior Agency, 2006 WL

4753474 (CHRO No. 0450057, May 23, 2006), which in turn was predicated on the

findings made by the Connecticut Supreme Court in Commission on Human Rights &

Opportunities v. Board of Education of the Town of Cheshire, 270 Conn. 665 (2004).

While the complainant offered no expert or corroborative testimony to support her claim

for damages for emotional distress, a complainant need not present medical testimony,

and, in fact, her own testimony may suffice. Schanzer v. United Technologies Corp.,

Page 9 of 14

Document info
Document views30
Page views30
Page last viewedSat Dec 03 04:56:18 UTC 2016
Pages14
Paragraphs401
Words3256

Comments