scope of governmental immunity (Connecticut) · Go Syfert
← Connecticut issues

scope of governmental immunity in Connecticut

11 Connecticut opinions name it 2 courts 1998–2021 2 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Connecticut courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (4)

CaseFollowedCited
Purzycki v. Town of Fairfieldgreen
conn · 1998 · cited in 3 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1999–2001
2 sentences

2001See also Purzycki v. Fairfield , 244 Conn. 101 , 107 , 708 A.2d 937 (1998).

2001See also Purzycki v. Fairfield , 244 Conn. 101 , 107 , 708 A.2d 937 (1998).

23
Durrant v. BD. OF EDUC. OF CITY OF HARTFORDgreen
conn · 2007 · cited in 2 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2019–2021
2 sentences

2021See, e.g., Violano v. Fernandez, 280 Conn. 310, 320 , 907 A.2d 1188 (2006) (‘‘[t]he tort liability of a municipality has been codified in § 52-557n’’); see also, e.g., Durrant v. Board of Education, 284 Conn. 91, 107 , 931 A.2d 859 (2007) (‘‘[s]ince the codification of the common law under § 52-557n [in 1986], this court has recognized that it is not free to expand or alter the scope of governmental immunity therein’’); Considine v. Water- bury, 279 Conn. 830, 844 , 905 A.2d 70 (2006) (concluding that § 52-557n (a) (1) (B) codified ‘‘municipal common-law liability for acts performed [by the mu

2021See, e.g., Violano v. Fernandez, 280 Conn. 310, 320 , 907 A.2d 1188 (2006) (‘‘[t]he tort liability of a municipality has been codified in § 52-557n’’); see also, e.g., Durrant v. Board of Education, 284 Conn. 91, 107 , 931 A.2d 859 (2007) (‘‘[s]ince the codification of the common law under § 52-557n [in 1986], this court has recognized that it is not free to expand or alter the scope of governmental immunity therein’’); Considine v. Water- bury, 279 Conn. 830, 844 , 905 A.2d 70 (2006) (concluding that § 52-557n (a) (1) (B) codified ‘‘municipal common-law liability for acts performed [by the mu

22
Violano v. Fernandezgreen
conn · 2006 · cited in 2 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2019–2021
2 sentences

2021See, e.g., Violano v. Fernandez, 280 Conn. 310, 320 , 907 A.2d 1188 (2006) (‘‘[t]he tort liability of a municipality has been codified in § 52-557n’’); see also, e.g., Durrant v. Board of Education, 284 Conn. 91, 107 , 931 A.2d 859 (2007) (‘‘[s]ince the codification of the common law under § 52-557n [in 1986], this court has recognized that it is not free to expand or alter the scope of governmental immunity therein’’); Considine v. Water- bury, 279 Conn. 830, 844 , 905 A.2d 70 (2006) (concluding that § 52-557n (a) (1) (B) codified ‘‘municipal common-law liability for acts performed [by the mu

2021See, e.g., Violano v. Fernandez, 280 Conn. 310, 320 , 907 A.2d 1188 (2006) (‘‘[t]he tort liability of a municipality has been codified in § 52-557n’’); see also, e.g., Durrant v. Board of Education, 284 Conn. 91, 107 , 931 A.2d 859 (2007) (‘‘[s]ince the codification of the common law under § 52-557n [in 1986], this court has recognized that it is not free to expand or alter the scope of governmental immunity therein’’); Considine v. Water- bury, 279 Conn. 830, 844 , 905 A.2d 70 (2006) (concluding that § 52-557n (a) (1) (B) codified ‘‘municipal common-law liability for acts performed [by the mu

12
Gordon v. Bridgeport Housing Authoritygreen
conn · 1988 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1998–1998
2 sentences

1998The court further finds that the plaintiff cannot prevail as a matter of law. "[I]t is the settled law of this state that a municipal corporation is not liable for negligence in the performance of a governmental function. . . . [The Connecticut Supreme Court] has previously stated that [a] municipality itself was generally immune from liability for its tortious acts at common law. . . however, that governmental immunity may be abrogated by statute." (Citations omitted; internal quotations marks omitted.) Williams v. New Haven, 243 Conn. 763 , 766 , — A.2d — (1998); see also Gordon v. Bridgport

1998The court further finds that the plaintiff cannot prevail as a matter of law. "[I]t is the settled law of this state that a municipal corporation is not liable for negligence in the performance of a governmental function. . . . [The Connecticut Supreme Court] has previously stated that [a] municipality itself was generally immune from liability for its tortious acts at common law. . . however, that governmental immunity may be abrogated by statute." (Citations omitted; internal quotations marks omitted.) Williams v. New Haven, 243 Conn. 763 , 766 , — A.2d — (1998); see also Gordon v. Bridgport

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
Elliott v. City of Waterbury green
conn · 1998
2 sentences

2001In outlining the scope of governmental immunity, the Connecticut Supreme Court has stated that "municipalities and their employees or agents have immunity from negligence liability for governmental acts involving the exercise of judgment or discretion." Elliot v. Waterbury , 245 Conn. 385 , 411 , 715 A.2d 27 (1998). "[A] municipal employee . . . has a qualified immunity in the performance of a governmental duty, but he may be liable if he misperforms a ministerial act, as opposed to a discretionary act." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id.

2001In outlining the scope of governmental immunity, the Connecticut Supreme Court has stated that "municipalities and their employees or agents have immunity from negligence liability for governmental acts involving the exercise of judgment or discretion." Elliot v. Waterbury , 245 Conn. 385 , 411 , 715 A.2d 27 (1998). "[A] municipal employee . . . has a qualified immunity in the performance of a governmental duty, but he may be liable if he misperforms a ministerial act, as opposed to a discretionary act." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id.

61999–2001
Rawling v. City of New Haven green
conn · 1988
2 sentences

2021It is axiomatic that ‘‘[s]tatutes that abrogate or modify governmental immunity are to be strictly construed.’’ Rawling v. New Haven, 206 Conn. 100, 105 , 537 A.2d 439 (1988). ‘‘Since the codification of the common law under § 52-557n [in 1986], this court has recognized that it is not free to expand or alter the scope of governmental immunity therein.’’ Durrant v. Board of Education, supra, 107.

2021It is axiomatic that ‘‘[s]tatutes that abrogate or modify governmental immunity are to be strictly construed.’’ Rawling v. New Haven, 206 Conn. 100, 105 , 537 A.2d 439 (1988). ‘‘Since the codification of the common law under § 52-557n [in 1986], this court has recognized that it is not free to expand or alter the scope of governmental immunity therein.’’ Durrant v. Board of Education, supra, 107.

12021–2021
Considine v. City of Waterbury green
conn · 2006
2 sentences

2021See, e.g., Violano v. Fernandez, 280 Conn. 310, 320 , 907 A.2d 1188 (2006) (‘‘[t]he tort liability of a municipality has been codified in § 52-557n’’); see also, e.g., Durrant v. Board of Education, 284 Conn. 91, 107 , 931 A.2d 859 (2007) (‘‘[s]ince the codification of the common law under § 52-557n [in 1986], this court has recognized that it is not free to expand or alter the scope of governmental immunity therein’’); Considine v. Water- bury, 279 Conn. 830, 844 , 905 A.2d 70 (2006) (concluding that § 52-557n (a) (1) (B) codified ‘‘municipal common-law liability for acts performed [by the mu

2021See, e.g., Violano v. Fernandez, 280 Conn. 310, 320 , 907 A.2d 1188 (2006) (‘‘[t]he tort liability of a municipality has been codified in § 52-557n’’); see also, e.g., Durrant v. Board of Education, 284 Conn. 91, 107 , 931 A.2d 859 (2007) (‘‘[s]ince the codification of the common law under § 52-557n [in 1986], this court has recognized that it is not free to expand or alter the scope of governmental immunity therein’’); Considine v. Water- bury, 279 Conn. 830, 844 , 905 A.2d 70 (2006) (concluding that § 52-557n (a) (1) (B) codified ‘‘municipal common-law liability for acts performed [by the mu

12021–2021
Conway v. Town of Wilton green
conn · 1996
2 sentences

2007Conway v. Wilton, 238 Conn. 653, 672 , 680 A.2d 242 (1996).

2007Conway v. Wilton, 238 Conn. 653, 672 , 680 A.2d 242 (1996).

12007–2007
Accashian v. City of Danbury, No. X01 Cv 97 0147228s (Jan. 6, 1998) green
connsuperct · 1999
2 sentences

1999Stat. § 52-557n (a)(2)(B) excepts municipal liability for "negligent acts or omissions which require the exercise of judgment or discretion as an official function of the authority expressly or impliedly granted by law." In Elliot v. City of Waterbury , 245 Conn. 385 , 407-08 (1998) ("Elliot"), the Supreme Court "ruled that the scope of governmental immunity is defined in part by § 52-557n (which in part codifies some aspects of the common law on the subject) and in part by common law principles concerning such immunity." Accashian v. City of Waterbury , 1999 Ct. Sup. 772 , 773 , 23 CLR 648 (1

1999Stat. § 52-557n (a)(2)(B) excepts municipal liability for "negligent acts or omissions which require the exercise of judgment or discretion as an official function of the authority expressly or impliedly granted by law." In Elliot v. City of Waterbury , 245 Conn. 385 , 407-08 (1998) ("Elliot"), the Supreme Court "ruled that the scope of governmental immunity is defined in part by § 52-557n (which in part codifies some aspects of the common law on the subject) and in part by common law principles concerning such immunity." Accashian v. City of Waterbury , 1999 Ct. Sup. 772 , 773 , 23 CLR 648 (1

11999–1999
Williams v. City of New Haven green
conn · 1998
1 sentence

1998The court further finds that the plaintiff cannot prevail as a matter of law. "[I]t is the settled law of this state that a municipal corporation is not liable for negligence in the performance of a governmental function. . . . [The Connecticut Supreme Court] has previously stated that [a] municipality itself was generally immune from liability for its tortious acts at common law. . . however, that governmental immunity may be abrogated by statute." (Citations omitted; internal quotations marks omitted.) Williams v. New Haven, 243 Conn. 763 , 766 , — A.2d — (1998); see also Gordon v. Bridgport

11998–1998

Statutes the citing opinions construe

CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-557n (4)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

MI 29 (1978–2025) TX 13 (1994–2025) CT 11 (1998–2021) UT 7 (1989–2016) CA 5 (1976–2014) IL 5 (1998–2003) PA 4 (1968–2026) WI 3 (2010–2013) NY 2 (1988–1989) IN 2 (2009–2010) MD 2 (1998–1998)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check