Legal Opinion
Kilduff v. Cosential, Inc.
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided February 25, 2003No. CIV. 3:02CV651 (PCD)PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULINGS ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION TO STRIKE
DORSEY, District Judge.
Defendants move to dismiss and to strike various counts. For the reasons set forth herein, defendants’ motion to dismiss is granted in part and the motion to strike is denied.
I. BACKGROUND
In October, 2000, defendant Cosential, Inc. (“Cosential”) hired plaintiff as executive assistant to a number of company officers including defendant Dan Cornish, Cosential’s Chief Executive Officer. During her term of employment with Cosential, plaintiff was required to clean Cornish’s office in which pornographic videotapes…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Faragher v. City of Boca RatonSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Hishon v. King & SpaldingSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Appleton v. Board of EducationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2000
- Petyan v. EllisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
- Sheets v. Teddy's Frosted Foods, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Grey v. City of Norwalk Board of EducationDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2004
- Lopez v. Burris Logistics Co.District Court, D. Connecticut · 2013
- Miller v. Edward Jones & Co.District Court, D. Connecticut · 2005
- Williams v. Community Solutions, Inc.District Court, D. Connecticut · 2013
- Nanos v. City of StamfordDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2009
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.