Allison Dunn

July 28, 2022 | Connecticut Law Tribune

"Given our review of the relevant federal case law and the particular facts of the case—specifically that (1) the plaintiff was not seat belted, (2) the defendant refused to acquire a larger vehicle, and (3) the defendant drove erratically and exceeded the speed limit—we conclude that the allegations in the plaintiff's complaint and the record before the court in connection with the defendant's motion for summary judgment do not give rise to a claim of deliberate indifference because no federal precedent clearly establishes that the defendant's conduct violates the constitution," Chief Justice William H. Bright Jr. wrote on behalf of the appellate panel.

By Allison Dunn

6 minute read

July 27, 2022 | Connecticut Law Tribune

"The statute is patently unconstitutional. There's no way it's not," Mario Cerame said about Section 53-37. "It is a content regulation, it is a viewpoint regulation—both of which are impermissible under First Amendment jurisprudence. It is also a due process violation. It prohibits someone from ridiculing or expressing contempt for another person or essentially a business from expressing contempt or ridicule."

By Allison Dunn

5 minute read

July 26, 2022 | Law.com

"In light of the Supreme Court's holdings in Regan, Grove City College, Smith, and Cannon, as discussed supra, this Court holds that §501(c)(3) tax exemption constitutes federal financial assistance for the purposes of Title IX," Judge Richard D. Bennett wrote. "Enforcing the mandates of Title IX in schools with §501(c)(3) status aligns with and protects the principal objectives of Title IX: "'to avoid the use of federal resources to support discriminatory practices' and 'to provide individual citizens effective protection against those practices,' Cannon, 441 U.S. at 704."

By Allison Dunn

4 minute read

July 25, 2022 | Law.com

"There are several facts in the record that speak to whether plaintiff was fired because of his religious practice or his refusal to trim his beard," U.S. District Judge Julie R. Rubin wrote. "The weight and credibility of those facts are best determined by a fact finder. Importantly, plaintiff raises the fact that Walden never prepared to utilize, or actually utilized, the N95 masks that served as the basis for requiring plaintiff to trim his beard to one-quarter inch. The fact finder must evaluate the credibility of Walden's claims that it had a legitimate purpose for terminating plaintiff."

By Allison Dunn

5 minute read

July 22, 2022 | Connecticut Law Tribune

In a dissenting opinion, Judge Eliot D. Prescott said the trial court's error in finding the defendants' motion to open was untimely likely "tainted the court's decision whether to exercise its discretion, at the very least, to grant the defendants a short continuance in order for them to present evidence in support of their motion to open."

By Allison Dunn

5 minute read

July 21, 2022 | Law.com

"[W]e reach the merits of the plaintiffs' claims, and rule that those claims fail as a matter of law," Associate Justice John Englander wrote on behalf of the unanimous panel. "While visits between parents and children in department custody must ordinarily be in person, the circumstances in the spring of 2020 were far from ordinary. It was within the department's discretion to adopt a policy, for that time, that favored parental contact by video conference, and sharply limited in-person visits. Nor, under the circumstances was the department required to secure court approval in advance."

By Allison Dunn

5 minute read

July 19, 2022 | Connecticut Law Tribune

"We conclude that the police officers' questioning of the defendant constituted interrogation for the purposes of 'Miranda' because the police officers should have known that their questions reasonably were likely to elicit incriminating statements from the defendant," Judge Eliot D. Prescott wrote on behalf of the appellate court.

By Allison Dunn

5 minute read

July 18, 2022 | Law.com

"The First, Third, Fifth, Seventh, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits have all concluded in published opinions that the First Amendment protects a right to film the police performing their duties in public," Judge Scott M. Matheson Jr. wrote on behalf of the Tenth Circuit panel.

By Allison Dunn

5 minute read

July 18, 2022 | Law.com

"Based on my review of other attorney's fee awards in this district over the past several years, adjusted to reflect the cost of legal services in the winter of 2021 (when the bulk of the work in this case occurred), these fee strike me as appropriate for experienced counsel. Accordingly, the fee award will be calculated using the secretary's proposed rates," wrote U.S. District Judge Lance E. Walker of the District of Maine.

By Allison Dunn

4 minute read

July 18, 2022 | Law.com

"The students have only ever asked for a fair refund representing the difference between the access to Suffolk's facilities and services that they prepaid for, and what was actually delivered during the Spring 2020 term," said Roy T. Willey IV, of Anastopoulo Law Firm in Charleston, South Carolina, one of the attorneys representing the plaintiffs.

By Allison Dunn

5 minute read