bar of sovereign immunity in Connecticut

2025Second, this court previously has recognized that ‘‘[t]he sole purpose of § 4-160 . . . is to remove the bar of sovereign immunity when the claims commissioner determines that it would be ‘just and equitable’ to permit a claimant to seek redress against the state.’’ Chotkow- ski v. State, 240 Conn. 246, 270 , 690 A.2d 368 (1997).

2025Second, this court previously has recognized that ‘‘[t]he sole purpose of § 4-160 . . . is to remove the bar of sovereign immunity when the claims commissioner determines that it would be ‘just and equitable’ to permit a claimant to seek redress against the state.’’ Chotkow- ski v. State, 240 Conn. 246, 270 , 690 A.2d 368 (1997).

2019This court first extrapolated from decisional law of other jurisdictions a set of "characteristics" that courts should consider in determining whether an entity is entitled to raise the bar of sovereign immunity. 9 Id., at 835-37 , 639 A.2d 530 .

2019This court first extrapolated from decisional law of other jurisdictions a set of "characteristics" that courts should consider in determining whether an entity is entitled to raise the bar of sovereign immunity. 9 Id., at 835-37 , 639 A.2d 530 .

2004Although we will not entirely disregard our rules of practice, we do give great latitude to pro se litigants in order that justice may both be done and be seen to be done.” (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Lemoine v. McCann, 40 Conn. App. 460, 468-69 , 673 A.2d 115 (Landau, J., dissenting), cert. denied, 237 Conn. 904 , 674 A.2d 1330 (1996). 6 General Statutes § 4-160 (a) provides: “When the Claims Commissioner deems it just and equitable, he may authorize suit against the state on any claim which, in his opinion, presents an issue of law or fact under which the state, we

2004Although we will not entirely disregard our rules of practice, we do give great latitude to pro se litigants in order that justice may both be done and be seen to be done.” (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Lemoine v. McCann, 40 Conn. App. 460, 468-69 , 673 A.2d 115 (Landau, J., dissenting), cert. denied, 237 Conn. 904 , 674 A.2d 1330 (1996). 6 General Statutes § 4-160 (a) provides: “When the Claims Commissioner deems it just and equitable, he may authorize suit against the state on any claim which, in his opinion, presents an issue of law or fact under which the state, we

2004Although we will not entirely disregard our rules of practice, we do give great latitude to pro se litigants in order that justice may both be done and be seen to be done.” (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Lemoine v. McCann, 40 Conn. App. 460, 468-69 , 673 A.2d 115 (Landau, J., dissenting), cert. denied, 237 Conn. 904 , 674 A.2d 1330 (1996). 6 General Statutes § 4-160 (a) provides: “When the Claims Commissioner deems it just and equitable, he may authorize suit against the state on any claim which, in his opinion, presents an issue of law or fact under which the state, we

2004Although we will not entirely disregard our rules of practice, we do give great latitude to pro se litigants in order that justice may both be done and be seen to be done.” (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Lemoine v. McCann, 40 Conn. App. 460, 468-69 , 673 A.2d 115 (Landau, J., dissenting), cert. denied, 237 Conn. 904 , 674 A.2d 1330 (1996). 6 General Statutes § 4-160 (a) provides: “When the Claims Commissioner deems it just and equitable, he may authorize suit against the state on any claim which, in his opinion, presents an issue of law or fact under which the state, we

2003If it appears to the court that the rights of nonparties will be prejudiced by its declaration, it shall order entry of judgment in such form as to affect only the parties to the action.” The plaintiffs also assert that their declaratory judgment action should be excepted from the bar of sovereign immunity because in Savage v. Aronson, 214 Conn. 256, 266 , 571 A.2d 696 (1990), this court stated that, “[w]e have excepted declaratory and injunctive relief from the sovereign immunity doctrine on the ground that a corut may fashion these remedies in such a manner as to minimize disruption of gover

2003If it appears to the court that the rights of nonparties will be prejudiced by its declaration, it shall order entry of judgment in such form as to affect only the parties to the action.” The plaintiffs also assert that their declaratory judgment action should be excepted from the bar of sovereign immunity because in Savage v. Aronson, 214 Conn. 256, 266 , 571 A.2d 696 (1990), this court stated that, “[w]e have excepted declaratory and injunctive relief from the sovereign immunity doctrine on the ground that a corut may fashion these remedies in such a manner as to minimize disruption of gover

1997Under the majority’s reading of the statute, there would be no purpose for the language in subsection (a) of § 4-160, which sets forth the “were it a private person, could be liable” standard, or, more importantly, for the third sentence in subsection (b), which provides that the “liability of the state in each such action shall be coextensive with and shall equal the . . . liability of private persons in like circumstances.” “There is a presumption of purpose behind every sentence, clause or phrase in a legislative enactment so that in construing it no part is treated as insignificant and unn

1997Under the majority’s reading of the statute, there would be no purpose for the language in subsection (a) of § 4-160, which sets forth the “were it a private person, could be liable” standard, or, more importantly, for the third sentence in subsection (b), which provides that the “liability of the state in each such action shall be coextensive with and shall equal the . . . liability of private persons in like circumstances.” “There is a presumption of purpose behind every sentence, clause or phrase in a legislative enactment so that in construing it no part is treated as insignificant and unn

1994Fetterman v. University of Connecticut , 192 Conn. 539 , 553 (1984); Duguay v. Hopkins , 191 Conn. 222 , 227 n. 4 (1983); and Weaver v. Ives , 152 Conn. 586 , 590-91 (1965).

1994"In the absence of legislative authority, . . . [the court has] declined to permit any monetary award against a state and its officials." Doe v. Heintz , 204 Conn. 17 , 32 , 526 A.2d 1318 (1987).

1994"In the absence of legislative authority, . . . [the court has] declined to permit any monetary award against a state and its officials." Doe v. Heintz , 204 Conn. 17 , 32 , 526 A.2d 1318 (1987).

1994Fetterman v. University of Connecticut , 192 Conn. 539 , 553 (1984); Duguay v. Hopkins , 191 Conn. 222 , 227 n. 4 (1983); and Weaver v. Ives , 152 Conn. 586 , 590-91 (1965).

1994Fetterman v. University of Connecticut , 192 Conn. 539 , 553 (1984); Duguay v. Hopkins , 191 Conn. 222 , 227 n. 4 (1983); and Weaver v. Ives , 152 Conn. 586 , 590-91 (1965).

1992We granted certification, limited to the following issue: “Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the plaintiff had adequately alleged facts amounting to a substantial claim of a violation of his constitutional right against taking of his property without just compensation, so as to avoid the bar of sovereign immunity?” Tamm v. Burns, 220 Conn. 914 , 597 A.2d 340 (1991).

1992We granted certification, limited to the following issue: “Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the plaintiff had adequately alleged facts amounting to a substantial claim of a violation of his constitutional right against taking of his property without just compensation, so as to avoid the bar of sovereign immunity?” Tamm v. Burns, 220 Conn. 914 , 597 A.2d 340 (1991).

1991The named defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 25 Conn. App. 468 , is granted, limited to the following issue: “Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the plaintiff had adequately alleged facts amounting to a substantial claim of a violation of his constitutional right against taking of his property without just compensation, so as to avoid the bar of sovereign immunity?”