Skip to main content

Twerdahl v. Wilton Public Schools

Unknown CourtJanuary 30, 2024
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Cradle; Westbrook; DiPentima
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
trial verdict

Related Laws

Claim Types

DiscriminationConstructive DischargeBreach of Contract

Excerpt

The plaintiff sought to recover damages from the defendant school district for her alleged constructive discharge from employment as a teacher. The plaintiff had been employed by the defendant for approximately twenty-four years when she resigned from her position in August, 2019. On December 19, 2019, she filed an age discrimination complaint with the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities (CHRO). There- after, the CHRO issued a release of jurisdiction over the complaint, and the plaintiff commenced the present action against the defendant, alleging a violation of the Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act (§ 46a-51 et seq.), constructive discharge, and breach of contract. The plaintiff, who was seventy years old, claimed that she was forced to resign after the defendant created an intolerable work environment by marginalizing and unfairly criticizing her because it wanted to replace her with a younger teacher. The defendant filed a motion to strike the plaintiff's complaint on the grounds that it was untimely and failed to state a claim on which relief could be granted. The trial court granted the defendant's motion, and, thereafter, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint alleging only constructive discharge. In that complaint, the plaintiff added allegations related to a report issued by the defendant on June 10, 2019, in which it acknowledged that an assistant principal had copied certain portions of the plaintiff's prior evaluations into her 2016–2017 school year evaluation and recommended a review of adminis- trators' practices of referencing evaluations from prior years. The defen- dant filed a motion to strike, which the trial court granted, finding that the plaintiff's complaint to the CHRO was untimely pursuant to the 180 day limitation period set forth in the applicable statute ((Rev. to 2019) § 46a-82 (f)), because the plaintiff had failed to identify conduct relating to an intolerable working environment that had persisted to June 22, 2019, o

What This Ruling Means

**Twerdahl v. Wilton Public Schools: Employment Discrimination Case Dismissed** This case involved a teacher who worked for Wilton Public Schools for 24 years before resigning in August 2019. The teacher, Twerdahl, believed she was forced to quit due to age discrimination and other workplace issues. She claimed the school district created such poor working conditions that she had no choice but to resign - a situation called "constructive discharge." After leaving her job, Twerdahl filed an age discrimination complaint with Connecticut's human rights agency in December 2019. She later took the school district to court, seeking financial compensation for discrimination, being forced to quit, and breach of contract. The court dismissed Twerdahl's case, meaning she did not win any damages from the school district. The court ruled against her claims. **What this means for workers:** This case shows how difficult it can be to prove constructive discharge and discrimination claims in court. Workers considering similar legal action should know that simply feeling forced to quit isn't enough - they need strong evidence that their employer's actions were illegal and directly caused their resignation. Documentation of workplace problems and following proper complaint procedures through HR or civil rights agencies can be crucial for building a strong case.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.