Court Upholds Retirees Decision Against Town

Eight retired town employees sued for retroactive wages and benefits, and the court agreed the town owes it to them.


A Superior Court judge has denied the town's appeal of of a ruling that it must pay retroactive pay to eight retired town employees who had claimed that the town breached its contract.

The case, Luzzi vs. the Town of Hamden, was decided in February of 2011 and the town appealed that decision.

The case involves eight employees -- L. Michael Luzzi, Thomas Brown, John Mendes, James Zarro, Michael Modena, Robert Kazden, Kenneth Copeland and John J. McCormack -- who in July of 2007 filed a 23-count complaint alleging breach of contract, unjust enrichment and negligent misrepresentation.

All eight employees retired between 2005 and 2006, and had been working under a contract that expired in 2003. Then in Oct. 2006 the Legislative Council approved an amendment to the contract that awarded retroactive wages, vacation and sick days, and pension benefits to employees employed from July 1, 2003 to June 30, 2007.

The retirees never received those retroactive benefits and sued for them, and the court found in their favor. The town appealed that decision, and this month the court upheld the original finding in the employees favor.

Mayor Scott Jackson couldn't be reached for comment Monday evening on whether the town will continue its legal recourse regarding the case.

Angela August 28, 2012 at 04:40 PM
If the town had READ the contracts in the first place, we would not have this problem now. This administration is USELESS. Mayor Jacson, his mouthpiece Leng, and the rest of his cronies, who are so clueless, have to go before anymore bad decisions are made.
Linda C August 28, 2012 at 05:03 PM
They are ONLY getting the retro-pay for the time they worked under the OLD or NO contract. The contract that was approved goes back to the date the original contract expired. Since those employees worked during that time, they most certainly deserve the retro pay for that time period. I don't understand WHO WOULD DENY THEM? It's spelled out in the contract THEY SIGNED OFF ON! Is there a TOWN ATTORNEY? Can't they READ or at the very LEAST DECIPHER a BASIC CONTRACT AGREEMENT? We could probably balance the Pension Budget if we had all the attorney and court costs wasted by the town of Hamden fighting cases they NEVER HAD A CHANCE OF WINNING!! The level of Incompetence of those who have been running this town since Peter Villano gets greater with each term!
Ted B August 28, 2012 at 06:03 PM
In Jackson's defense, this suit predates his administration. But I would urge him to drop the appeals and make it go away, whatever that takes. Enough fighting these winless suits.
Feed up August 30, 2012 at 02:02 AM
Remember Jackson was Henrici chief Aid and was well aware of the issues surrounding this. Everyone passing the tax payers buck wasting money on legal advice. It's a shame the monies owed was in escarole account until someone decided not to pay the retro.
KJ Copeland August 30, 2012 at 01:17 PM
Ellen Doesnt Nose if retro pay isn't in an agreement, there is no reason for a good faith negotiation, as contract talks would go on even longer than they do now, well, the other option is let the workers strike.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »