Hartford Employment and Civil Rights Attorney
Hartford Employment and Civil Rights Lawyer Firm Profile Attorneys Practice Areas Results Contact Us Visit Our Blog
Disability Discrimination
Pregnancy Discrimination
Race Discrimination
Family Medical Leave Violation
Unpaid Wage and Overtime
Breach Of Contract
Wistle Blower & Retaliation Violations
Wrongful Termination
Civil Rights
National Origin Discrimination
National Origin Discrimination
workers' compensation retaliation
Sexual Harassment
Age Discrimination

Workers' Compensation Retaliation

CT Workers' Compensation Discrimination Lawyers

It is illegal for an employer in Connecticut to terminate or in any manner discriminate against an employee for filing a claim for workers' compensation benefits or otherwise exercising his or her rights under the workers' compensation laws. In order to prove a case of wrongful termination or discrimination, the plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that his discharge was due to intentional discrimination based on his filing a claim for workers' compensation benefits. Intentional discrimination is proved if the plaintiff demonstrates by a preponderance of the evidence that his filing a workers' compensation claim was a motivating factor for his discharge. A "motivating factor" is a factor that made a difference in the defendant's decision.

The plaintiff does not have to prove that the filing of a workers' compensation claim was the sole or even the principal reason for the decision, as long as he proves that it was a determinative influence in the decision. He may prove intentional discrimination directly by proving that his filing the workers' compensation claim motivated the defendant's action in discharging him or indirectly by proving that the reason given by the defendant for the discharge was unworthy of belief.

The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.