Sokolovsky v. Mulholland
Citations
- 213 Conn. App. 128
Syllabus
The plaintiff sought to recover damages from the defendants for alleged discriminatory conduct. The plaintiff filed a discrimination complaint with the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities alleging that the defendant town of East Lyme discriminated against him on the basis of national origin by denying him equal services and by treating him differently than his neighbors. The commission issued a release of juris- diction, concluding that the evidence was insufficient to warrant further investigation. The Superior Court granted the plaintiff's application for a waiver of fees, and the plaintiff subsequently served the defendants with a summons and complaint. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the court lacked subject matter jurisdic- tion pursuant to statute (§ 46a-101), because the plaintiff commenced the action more than ninety days after he received the release of jurisdic- tion. The trial court granted the motion to dismiss, concluding that the time limitation in § 46a-101 was subject matter jurisdictional and not subject to equitable tolling. The court determined that, although the plaintiff had filed an application for a waiver of fees, the plaintiff's complaint was commenced, by service of the summons and complaint, beyond the ninety day limitation period. The court also concluded that the plaintiff improperly failed to plead the continuing course of conduct doctrine in his complaint in order for it to consider its affect on the limitation period. On the plaintiff's appeal to this court, held: 1. The trial court erred in concluding that the ninety day limitation period for commencing an action pursuant to the applicable statute (§ 46a-100) was subject matter jurisdictional: neither the language of § 46a-101 nor its legislative history revealed any indication that the legislature intended the time limitation of that statute to be jurisdictional, the geneaology of our antidiscrimination laws suggested an ongoing leg
Judges: Moll; Clark; Sheldon
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
1 case in this archive cites this case.
Cites
27 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Zipes v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.Supreme Court· 1982-02-24· cited 2,939×
- Aurelia SCHOLAR, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. PACIFIC BELL, a Pacific Telesis Company, a Corporation, Defendant/AppelleeNinth Circuit· 1992-04-30· cited 194×
- Addie JOHNSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AL TECH SPECIALTIES STEEL CORP., Defendant-AppelleeSecond Circuit· 1984-03-27· cited 172×
- Richard G. ESPINOZA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MISSOURI PACIFIC RAILROAD CO., Defendant-AppelleeFifth Circuit· 1985-03-11· cited 155×
- Debora D. Gordon v. National Youth Work AllianceD.C. Circuit· 1982-04-02· cited 145×
- Diane FOUCHE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. the JEKYLL ISLAND-STATE PARK AUTHORITY, Defendant-AppelleeEleventh Circuit· 1983-09-09· cited 137×
- Bowen-Hooks v. City of New YorkE.D. New York· 2014-03-31· cited 137×
- Ann Williams-Guice v. Board of Education of the City of ChicagoSeventh Circuit· 1995-01-27· cited 135×
- Commissioner of Mental Health & Addiction Services v. SaeediConnecticut Appellate Court· 2013-07-09· cited 110×
- Marion S. RICE, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. NEW ENGLAND COLLEGE, Defendant, AppelleeFirst Circuit· 1982-05-03· cited 105×
- Williams v. Commission On Human Rights & OpportunitiesSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2001-08-07· cited 91×
- Hill v. John Chezik ImportsEighth Circuit· 1989-03-13· cited 89×
- Theola A. Jarrett v. Us Sprint Communications CompanyTenth Circuit· 1994-04-26· cited 86×
- Ross Realty Corp. v. SurkisSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1972-07-12· cited 83×
- Gary K. Mosel v. Hills Department Store, Inc.Third Circuit· 1986-05-01· cited 77×
- Town Sound & Custom Tops, Inc. v. Chrysler Motors Corp.Supreme Court· 1992-10-05· cited 71×
- Peters v. Department of Social ServicesSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2005-04-26· cited 65×
- Sullivan v. Metro-North Commuter RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2009-06-16· cited 54×
- Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities v. Board of EducationSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2004-08-31· cited 50×
- City of Hartford v. Hartford Municipal Employees Ass'nSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2002-01-29· cited 47×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.