McWeeny v. City of Hartford

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that guid- ance from case law interpreting Title VII was unneces- sary because relevant language of state act was ‘‘susceptible of only one reasonable interpretation’’
• stating that plain language of § 46a-60 [a] [1] limits its protections to former, current, or prospective employees
• determining whether recipient of surviving spouse pen- sion allowance had standing to bring marital status discrimination complaint pursuant to General Statutes § 46a-60 (a) (1)
• recipient of surviving spouse pension allowance lacked standing to bring marital status discrimination com- plaint pursuant to General Statutes § 46a-60 (a) (1)
• the term \such individual\ plainly refers back to \any individual\
• the term “such individual” plainly refers back to “any individual”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).