|
Profile Visibility  | | #174 in weekly profile views out of 2,610 lawyers in Hartford, Connecticut | | #60,152 in weekly profile views out of 968,464 total lawyers Overall |
|
|
| |
| Practice Areas | Appellate Practice; Employment Litigation | | | Education | University of Connecticut School of Law, J.D., with high honors, 2003, Connecticut Law Review, Connecticut Moot Court Board, Villanova University, B.S., cum laude, 1999 | | | Admitted | 2004, Connecticut and New York; U.S. District Court, District of Connecticut; U.S. Court of Appeals, First and Second Circuits | |
| Memberships | Hartford County, Connecticut, New York State and American Bar Associations. | | | Biography | Law Clerk to the Honorable Justice David M. Borden, Connecticut Supreme Court, 2003-2004. | | | ISLN | 918061636 | |
Documents by this lawyer on Martindale.com
Age is Different - Higher Burden of Proof for WorkersDouglas W. Bartinik, Wendy Johnson Lario, July 9, 2009 On June 18, 2009, the United States Supreme Court rejected the notion that an employee alleging age discrimination may use the so-called "mixed motive" theory to shift the burden of proof to the employer.
Supreme Court Issues New Ruling Favorable to EmployersVictoria Woodin Chavey, Douglas W. Bartinik, June 25, 2009 On June 18, 2009, in Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc., the United States Supreme Court rejected the notion that an age discrimination plaintiff may use the so-called "mixed motive" theory to require the defendant to prove that it would have taken the challenged action regardless of...
Chief Justice's Decision to Permit Interlocutory Appeal Cannot be challengedDouglas W. Bartinik, February 26, 2009 The Supreme Court of Connecticut refused to usurp the Chief Justice's statutory authority to permit a direct, interlocutory appeal to the Supreme Court under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-265a, holding that the Chief Justice's determination of whether the action "involves a matter of substantial... |
|
|
RSS | Blog | Advertising Opportunities | Site Map | Contact Us
