205 Conn.App. 129
Conn. App. Ct.2021Background
- Pablo Ortiz Jr. was an at-will varsity football and basketball coach at Bulkeley High School (HPS), hired in 2010.
- On January 25, 2017, an assistant coach complained about Ortiz; HPS received similar complaints from many former/current players.
- On January 27, 2017 Ortiz was terminated; the next day defendant Leslie Torres-Rodriguez, acting superintendent, issued a public statement prioritizing student safety and condemning "unacceptable staff behavior."
- HPS HR executive Natasha Banks and labor relations specialist Milly Ramos submitted affidavits showing Banks (not Torres-Rodriguez) terminated Ortiz after numerous complaints; Ramos had investigated but did not complete an internal investigation before termination; HPS reported allegations to DCF.
- DCF later investigated and cleared Ortiz in March/April 2017; Torres-Rodriguez did not retract her statement or rehire Ortiz.
- Ortiz sued Torres-Rodriguez asserting recklessness, intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED), and libel; the defendant moved for summary judgment, which the court granted in full.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Liability for wrongful termination / authority to fire | Ortiz alleged Torres-Rodriguez recklessly terminated him and failed to follow HPS/DCF protocols. | Torres-Rodriguez submitted affidavits showing she had no role or authority to terminate Ortiz; Banks terminated him. | Summary judgment for defendant; Ortiz offered no evidence disputing she did not terminate him. |
| Recklessness (count one) | Torres-Rodriguez used his termination to advance her agenda and made false press statements implying misconduct. | Even if statement suggested misconduct, conduct was not an extreme departure from reasonable care; Ortiz was at-will and proper protocols followed. | Summary judgment for defendant; no evidence of extreme/reckless conduct. |
| Intentional infliction of emotional distress (count two) | The press statement publicly stigmatized Ortiz (implying child abuse) causing severe distress. | Statement was general, did not identify Ortiz, and was not extreme or outrageous. | Summary judgment for defendant; statement not sufficiently extreme/outrageous as a matter of law. |
| Libel / defamation (count three) | The statement, in context with news reports, insinuated Ortiz was under DCF investigation and an abuser. | The statement did not mention Ortiz or child abuse; plaintiff must show falsity with actual malice (public-official standard). | Summary judgment for defendant; extrinsic articles do not make the statement defamatory or show actual malice. |
Key Cases Cited
- Graham v. Commissioner of Transportation, 330 Conn. 400, 195 A.3d 664 (summary judgment standard requires viewing evidence in favor of nonmovant)
- Buell Industries, Inc. v. Greater New York Mutual Ins. Co., 259 Conn. 527, 791 A.2d 489 (definition of material fact and summary judgment evidentiary showing)
- Morrissey-Manter v. Saint Francis Hospital & Medical Center, 166 Conn. App. 510, 142 A.3d 363 (at-will employment allows termination without cause)
- Kwasnik v. Community Action Committee of Danbury, 43 Conn. App. 840, 686 A.2d 526 (at-will employment principles)
- Matthiessen v. Vanech, 266 Conn. 822, 836 A.2d 394 (definition of recklessness requiring conscious choice involving serious danger)
- Petyan v. Ellis, 200 Conn. 243, 510 A.2d 1337 (elements of IIED claim)
- Appleton v. Board of Education, 254 Conn. 205, 757 A.2d 1059 (court decides as a matter of law whether conduct is extreme and outrageous)
- Carnemolla v. Walsh, 75 Conn. App. 319, 815 A.2d 1251 (examples of insufficiently outrageous conduct for IIED)
- Kelley v. Bonney, 221 Conn. 549, 606 A.2d 693 (public-official defamation requires clear and convincing proof of actual malice)