Telling harasser to “stop” constitutes protected opposition under Title VII and CFEPA.

A new Connecticut Superior Court opinion holds correctly that a woman’s communications to her harasser demanding that he stop constitutes protected opposition to discrimination under Title VII and CFEPA.  In Hoydic v. Genesco, Inc., 2008 WL 1914338, Judge Bruce Levin refused to dismiss a woman’s retaliation claims under Title VII and CFEPA and rejected the defendant’s argument that she had not engaged in protected opposition when she told her harasser to stop.

“[T]his court holds that the plaintiff has sufficiently alleged that she engaged in protected activity by pleading that she demanded Lunn cease his sexual advances and attacks on her.”

The case has a number of other interesting points to it, but this was the most intriguing for me.  Plaintiff’s lawyers should not hesitate going forward to include retaliation claims based on the victim’s communications directly to her harasser, despite the fact that there may not have been a communication to HR or management.

Tags: , ,

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Contact Us Today


I worked for a retailer and was a Plaintiff in a class action for unpaid overtime wages. Hayber, McKenna & Dinsmore did an amazing job of getting our unpaid overtime back to us. Every one at the firm that I dealt with through that process was wonderful to work with. I appreciate all they did for us more than you will ever know.
- L. LeHeup, Georgia