Keane v. Fischetti, 300 Conn. 395

Two Waterbury fire trucks operated by firefighters collided, injuring one firefighter and causing death to John Keane; William Mahoney was injured.
Both cases involve firefighters who are eligible for workers’ compensation; plaintiffs seek additional damages beyond workers’ compensation.
General Statutes § 7-308(b) bars negligence actions among coworkers when a firefighter is entitled to workers’ compensation benefits, with an exception for wilful/malicious conduct.
General Statutes § 7-465(a) bars similar actions among other municipal employees, but § 7-308 provides no such exception for firefighters.
Trial court struck all counts against defendants on § 7-308 immunity grounds; both cases were appealed to the appellate court and then transferred to the Supreme Court.
The court analyzes whether § 7-308’s immunity violates equal protection under federal and state constitutions and affirms the trial court’s judgments.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Does § 7-308 violate equal protection by treating firefighters differently from other municipal employees?	Keane contends firefighters are singled out for harsher treatment.	Defendants argue rational basis supports reducing municipal liability and preserving firefighting effectiveness.	No equal-protection violation; rational basis exists.
Does § 7-308 discriminate against firefighters in favor of private employees?	Keane argues private employees can sue coworkers under § 31-293a while firefighters cannot.	Keogh's rationale supports reducing municipal liability; classification is rational.	No equal-protection violation; Keogh controls.
Is the § 7-308 classification rational under the applicable standard of review?	Plaintiffs claim no rational basis exists for singling out firefighters.	Defendants contend rational speculation supports the classification.	Yes; rational-basis review sustains § 7-308.

Keogh v. Bridgeport, 187 Conn. 53 (1982) (statutory purpose to limit municipal liability; double liability rationale)
Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma, Inc., 348 U.S. 483 (U.S. 1955) (legislative classifications may be reasonable even if not perfect; rational basis deferential standard)
Batte-Holmgren v. Commissioner of Public Health, 281 Conn. 277 (2007) (standard for assessing pleadings and equal protection analyses)
State v. Wright, 246 Conn. 132 (1998) (legislative classifications may rely on rational conjecture)
Contractor’s Supply of Waterbury, LLC v. Commissioner of Environmental Protection, 283 Conn. 86 (2007) (rational-basis review framework and deference to legislature)
City Recycling, Inc. v. State, 257 Conn. 429 (2001) (scope of rational basis review and deference to legislative choices)
Harris v. Commissioner of Correction, 271 Conn. 808 (2004) (rational basis review standards in equal protection)