Dear Editor:
In Quinlan v. Curtiss-Wright, decided by the state Supreme Court on Dec. 2, a jury found by clear and convincing evidence that defendant Curtiss-Wright, through no less a person than its CEO, Martin Benante, intentionally discriminated against plaintiff Joyce Quinlan because of her gender and, after Quinlan complained of unlawful discrimination, retaliated against her by terminating her employment. The jury rejected the explanations Curtiss-Wright offered at trial, including its claim that it terminated Quinlan for copying the performance appraisal of the male employee who was given the human-resources position she deserved.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
