Torrington v. Council 4, AFSCME, AFL-CIO, Local 442

Citations

• 232 Conn. App. 45

Syllabus

The defendants, a union and a former police officer, appealed from the judgment of the Superior Court granting the plaintiff city's application to vacate an arbitration award that required the city to reinstate the officer in its police department and denying the defendants' application to confirm the award. The defendants claimed, inter alia, that the court improperly concluded that the arbitration panel manifestly disregarded the law. Held: The trial court's conclusion that the arbitration panel manifestly disregarded the law was erroneous because the panel properly evaluated the defendant officer's use of force under the objective standard set forth in Graham v. Connor (490 U.S. 386), determined that the use of force was objectively reasonable under the circumstances, and did not rely on the officer's subjec- tive perspective in making its determination. This court, having considered the four factors set forth in Burr Road Operating Co. II, LLC v. New England Health Care Employees Union, District 1199 (316 Conn. 618) for determining whether termination of employment was necessary to vindicate public policy, concluded that, although the defendant officer's employment implicated public safety and the public trust, his use of force was objectively reasonable and, thus, the trial court improperly vacated the arbitration award. Argued February 10—officially released April 15, 2025