Free Statement of Material Facts - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut


File Size: 46.9 kB
Pages: 6
Date: January 13, 2006
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 1,059 Words, 6,822 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/9116/117.pdf

Download Statement of Material Facts - District Court of Connecticut ( 46.9 kB)


Preview Statement of Material Facts - District Court of Connecticut
Case 3:00-cv-00339-RNC

Document 117

Filed 01/17/2006

Page 1 of 6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

: : : v. : : LYNNE B. PIERSON, ELLEN C. : HEALY, CHRISTOPHER A. DUMAS, : PATRICIA M. STRONG, CHRISTINE : T. FORTUNATO, DONNA H. HEMMANN, : STACEY HODGES, JOHN F. MORRIS, : FREDERICK E. PETRELLI, JR., : PENNY H. STANZIALE, and : WETHERSFIELD BOARD OF EDUCATION: Defendants :

THOMAS O'CONNOR, Plaintiff

NO.: 3:00CV339 (RNC)

JANUARY 13, 2006

LOCAL RULE 56(a)1 STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 and Local Rule 56, the defendants, Lynn B. Pierson, Ellen C. Healy, Christopher A. Dumas, Patricia M. Strong, Christine T. Fortunato, Donna H. Hemmann, Stacey Hodges, John F. Morris, Frederick E. Petrelli, Penny H. Stanziale, and Wethersfield Board of Education, submit the following statement of undisputed material facts in support of their Motion for Summary Judgment dated January 13, 2006. Relevant court documents and other admissible evidence are attached as exhibits. 1. The operative complaint in this lawsuit is the Second Amended Complaint

dated April 28, 2000. See Second Amended Complaint, filed on May 1, 2000.

Case 3:00-cv-00339-RNC

Document 117

Filed 01/17/2006

Page 2 of 6

2.

In the First Count, the plaintiff sought a temporary and permanent

injunction enjoining the defendants from forcing the plaintiff to undergo a psychiatric examination. That count is now moot. See Second Amended Complaint, filed on May 1, 2000. 3. In Counts Two through Seven, the plaintiff alleges negligent infliction of

emotional distress (Count Two), intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count Three), invasion of privacy (Count Four), deprivation of property and liberty interests under 42 U.S.C. §1983 (Count Five), deprivation of rights under the Connecticut Constitution (Count Six), and intentional interference with beneficial and contractual relations (Count Seven). See Second Amended Complaint, filed on May 1, 2000. 4. On June 11, 2001, while this action was still pending before the District

Court, Thomas O'Connor filed a separate lawsuit in Connecticut Superior Court against the Wethersfield Board of Education. See Exhibit A. 5. By way of an eight-count amended complaint filed in the Superior Court

action, Thomas O'Connor alleged breach of contract (Count One), refusal to pay wages in violation of Conn. Gen. Stat. §31-71a et seq. (Count Two), wrongful constructive discharge (Count Three), violation of his rights under the Connecticut Constitution (Count Four), negligent infliction of emotional distress (Count Five), intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count Six), tortuous invasion of privacy (Count Seven), and retaliation in violation of his first amendment rights pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. §3151q (Count Eight). See Exhibit A.

2

Case 3:00-cv-00339-RNC

Document 117

Filed 01/17/2006

Page 3 of 6

6.

The Wethersfield Board of Education filed a motion for summary judgment

as to all eight counts. The Superior Court (Booth, J.) granted summary judgment in favor of the Board as to Counts One, Two, Three, and Four. See Exhibit B. 7. Upon reconsideration, the Superior Court also granted summary judgment

in favor of the Board as to Count Five. See Exhibit C. 8. The common law claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress and

tortuous invasion of privacy, and the statutory claim pursuant to §31-51q, proceeded to trial in September 2003 in Hartford Superior Court. See Exhibit D; Exhibit E; and Exhibit F. 9. At trial, Thomas O'Connor litigated the events between March 1999 and

his return to teaching in February 2002. See Exhibit D; and Exhibit E. 10. On September 19, 2003, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Thomas

O'Connor as to the tortuous invasion of privacy claim. See Exhibit F. 11. 12. The jury found for the Board on the remaining two counts. See Exhibit F. Thomas O'Connor was awarded damages in the Superior Court action in

the amount of $162,500. See Exhibit F. 13. The Superior Court denied the Board's post-trial motions and, in

accordance with the jury verdict, entered judgment in favor of Thomas O'Connor on October 31, 2003. See Exhibit G.

3

Case 3:00-cv-00339-RNC

Document 117

Filed 01/17/2006

Page 4 of 6

14.

At the time the state court judgment entered in the Superior Court action,

the District Court had yet to enter judgment in this case. See Judgment, filed on December 16, 2003. 15. On December 10, 2003, the District Court granted summary judgment in

favor of the defendants as to the substantive due process claim, the only federal claim remaining, and remanded the pendent state law claims to Superior Court. See Ruling and Order, filed on December 12, 2003. 16. Judgment entered in favor of the defendants in this federal lawsuit on

December 16, 2003. See Judgment, filed on December 16, 2003. 17. On July 5, 2005, the Connecticut Appellate Court reversed the state court

judgment and remanded with direction to set aside the verdict and render judgment in favor of the defendant. See O'Connor v. Board of Educ. of Town of Wethersfield, 90 Conn. App. 59, 877 A.2d 860 (2005). 18. On September 12, 2005, the Connecticut Supreme Court denied the

plaintiff's petition for certification. See O'Connor v. Board of Educ. of Town of Wethersfield, 275 Conn. 912, 882 A.2d 675 (2005). 19. On October 11, 2005, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the

judgment in favor of the defendants as to the procedural due process claim, but vacated the judgment as to the substantive due process claim. See O'Connor v. Pierson, 426 F.3d 187 (2nd Cir. 2005).

4

Case 3:00-cv-00339-RNC

Document 117

Filed 01/17/2006

Page 5 of 6

20.

The plaintiff did not appeal the District Court's ruling granting qualified

immunity to Dr. Pierson, the only named individual defendant who was sued in her individual capacity. See Notice of Appeal, filed on January 6, 2004.

DEFENDANTS, LYNNE B. PIERSON, ELLEN C. HEALY, CHRISTOPHER A. DUMAS, PATRICIA M. STRONG, CHRISTINE T. FORTUNATO, DONNA H. HEMMANN, STACEY HODGES, JOHN F. MORRIS, FREDERICK E. PETRELLI, JR., PENNY H. STANZIALE, and WETHERSFIELD BOARD OF EDUCATION

By/s/Alexandria L. Voccio Alexandria L. Voccio [ct21792] Howd & Ludorf, LLC 65 Wethersfield Avenue Hartford, CT 06114 (860) 249-1361 (860) 249-7665 (Fax) E-Mail: [email protected]

5

Case 3:00-cv-00339-RNC

Document 117

Filed 01/17/2006

Page 6 of 6

CERTIFICATION This is to certify that a copy of the foregoing has been sent, handling charges prepaid, via U.S. Mail, to the following counsel of record this 13th day of January 2006. Leon M. Rosenblatt, Esquire Law Offices of Leon M. Rosenblatt 10 North Main Street, Suite 214 West Hartford, CT 06107-1988

/s/Alexandria L. Voccio Alexandria L. Voccio

6