IMO Estate of George Wroten Cordray

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that qualified immunity applied since it was objectively reasonable to conclude that plaintiff could be fired without a hearing where employment agreement was ambiguous as to whether town could only fire plaintiff for cause
• finding an individual defendant protected by the doctrine of qualified immunity where he “read the [employment] [a]greement [at issue], sought legal advice, and reasonably concluded that [the plaintiff] could be terminated without a hearing”
• “[T]he qualified immunity defense also protects an official if it was objectively reasonable for him at the time of the challenged action to believe his acts were lawful.” (quotation marks and citation omitted)
• “Under Connecticut law, employment is at-will by default, and parties must specifically contract a right to be terminated only for cause. ... An exception exists for contracts that create employment for a fixed period.”
• “We need not decide whether reliance on legal advice constitutes an ‘extraordinary circumstance’ sufficient by itself to give rise to qualified immunity, because at the very least the solicitation of legal advice informs the reasonableness inquiry.” (citation omitted)
• ‘‘Under Connecticut law, employment is at-will by default, and parties must specifically contract a right to be terminated only for cause. . . . An exception exists for contracts that create employment for a fixed period.’’ [Citation omitted.]

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).