Jury Clears Sage Dining Services in Jones Retaliation Case
Table of Contents
Case Background
The legal dispute between Timothy Jones and Sage Dining Services, Inc. originated from allegations of workplace misconduct and subsequent retaliation at Franklin Academy. Timothy Jones began his tenure with Sage Dining Services on December 15, 2021, when the company hired him as the Food Service Director for the East Haddam facility. In this leadership role, he oversaw the dining operations and managed the staff responsible for feeding the student body.
The professional environment soured when Jones became aware of disturbing behavior involving a high-ranking supervisor. Specifically, he learned that the District Manager, Russell Price, allegedly perpetrated ongoing sexual harassment within the workplace. The situation escalated after a female employee reported that Price touched her in a way that made her feel deeply uncomfortable. This employee shared her concerns with the Executive Chef, Chris Torres, who then brought the matter to the attention of Jones.
Believing he needed to address the issue head-on, Jones organized a meeting on December 5, 2022, with both Price and Torres. He prepared a formal agenda that explicitly included a discussion regarding the sexual harassment allegations. However, when Jones attempted to broach the subject, Price reportedly refused to discuss the matter.
Tensions continued to mount over the following weeks. On December 16, 2022, another supervisor directed Chris Torres to attend sexual harassment training, even though Torres was not the individual accused of the misconduct. This directive led Torres to resign, as he felt the company’s leadership did not align with his professional values. Jones made one final effort to resolve the issue by sending a letter to Human Resources on December 27, 2022, which outlined the unaddressed harassment claims. The very next day, after a brief conversation with Price about the HR letter, the company terminated Jones and demanded he return his keys.
Cause
The primary cause of this legal action was the alleged retaliatory termination of Timothy Jones. Jones asserted that Sage Dining Services fired him specifically because he opposed discriminatory employment practices and spoke up about sexual harassment. He argued that his reports to management and Human Resources constituted "protected activity" under Connecticut law.
Injury
In this civil lawsuit, the "injury" referred to the financial and emotional toll the job loss took on Jones. Because the company terminated his employment, he suffered a loss of wages and professional benefits. Additionally, Jones claimed that the sudden firing caused him substantial emotional distress and deprived him of future career opportunities.
Damages Sought
In his complaint, Timothy Jones sought several forms of relief from the Court. He requested money damages to compensate for his lost income, as well as punitive damages to punish the company for its conduct. Furthermore, he asked for either reinstatement to his former position or "front pay" to cover future lost earnings. He also demanded that the company pay for his attorney's fees and the overall costs of the lawsuit. The total amount in demand exceeded $15,000.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
The case moved through the Superior Court for the Judicial District of Middlesex at Middletown. Before filing the lawsuit, Jones had submitted a complaint to the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities (CHRO). After the CHRO released its jurisdiction in September 2023, Jones officially filed his civil complaint in October 2023. The legal process involved extensive discovery and arguments regarding whether the company had a legitimate reason for the firing or if it was a clear case of illegal retaliation.
Legal Representation
Plaintiff(s): Timothy Jones
Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Michael J. Reilly, Esq. | Emanuele Cicchiello, Esq.
Defendant(s): Sage Dining Services, Inc.
Counsel for Defendant(s): Robert G. Clemente, Esq.
Key Arguments or Remarks by Counsel
Claims
Attorneys for Timothy Jones argued that the timing of the firing provided undeniable proof of retaliation. They pointed out that the company terminated Jones less than twenty-four hours after he confronted the District Manager about his letter to Human Resources. The legal team contended that Jones acted as a whistle-blower who tried to protect a female colleague from harassment. They argued that any reasons the company gave for the firing were merely a "pretext" or a cover-up designed to hide their true discriminatory motives.
Defense
The defense for Sage Dining Services countered that the company acted in good faith at all times. They filed an official answer denying that the termination had anything to do with the harassment complaints. Counsel argued that any employment decisions regarding Jones were based on legitimate, business-related reasons rather than a desire to retaliate. Furthermore, the defense raised "special defenses," claiming that Jones failed to mitigate his damages by looking for a new job. They also insisted that the company would have taken the same action regardless of any "prohibited factor" mentioned by the Plaintiff.
Jury Verdict
On November 26, 2025, the jury gathered in the Middletown Courtroom to deliver their final decision after hearing all the evidence.
The Decision on Retaliation The jury focused on the central question of whether Sage Dining Services violated Connecticut law by retaliating against Jones. On the "Defendant’s Verdict Form," the jury stated that they found the issues in favor of the Defendant, Sage Dining Services, Inc., regarding the first and only count of the complaint. This meant the jury did not believe the evidence proved that the company fired Jones as a direct punishment for his complaints about sexual harassment.
Final Judgment After the jury returned their verdict at 12:15 p.m., the Court officially accepted the findings. Judge Rupal Shah entered a formal judgment for the Defendant. Consequently, Timothy Jones did not receive any of the money damages or the job reinstatement he had sought in his original filing. The jury's decision effectively cleared Sage Dining Services of the retaliation charges, concluding that the Plaintiff failed to meet the legal burden of proof required to win the case. The foreperson, Karm MI Fletcher, signed the document, bringing the two-year legal battle to a close.