Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 13a-14 (2026)

State highway system

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

There shall be a system of state highways which shall include (1) state primary highways, which are highways serving the predominant flow of traffic between the principal towns of this state and between such towns and similar towns of the surrounding states; (2) state secondary highways, which are connecting and feeder highways which supplement the state primary system by serving the predominant flow of traffic between the smaller towns of the state and between such towns and other towns in this state and in surrounding states; and (3) state special service highways, which are highways which provide access from the primary and secondary systems of state highways to federal and state facilities.

(1961, P.A. 603, S. 2; 1963, P.A. 226, S. 14; P.A. 96-180, S. 32, 166.)

History: 1963 act replaced previous provisions: See title history; P.A. 96-180 replaced alphabetic Subdiv. indicators with numeric indicators, effective June 3, 1996.

Cited. 186 C. 300; 228 C. 350.

Cited. 44 CA 651.

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)

(Return to
List of Chapters)

(Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1982–2025 · leading case: Amore v. Frankel, 636 A.2d 786 (Conn. 1994).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Amore v. Frankel, 636 A.2d 786 (Conn. 1994). · cites it 4× “” General Statutes § 13a-14 provides: “state highway system.”

Cairns v. Shugrue, 441 A.2d 185 (Conn. 1982). · cites it 3× “The conclusion we have reached makes it unnecessary to discuss the alternative theory of liability which the plaintiff has presented, that Whitney Road is part of the “state highway system” by *311 virtue of General Statutes § 13a-14 (e) even though it is not included on the…”

Lipwich v. Frankel, 691 A.2d 1099 (Conn. App. Ct. 1997). · cites it 5× “The court also determined, from the documents submitted, that the sidewalk where the injury allegedly occurred was not part of the state highway as defined by General Statutes § 13a-14, 4 and concluded that, therefore, any duty on *654 the part of the defendant must arise, if at…”

United States Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Dellomo (D. Conn. 2025). “Finally, while the Second Circuit has not decided the issue, the Court joins the numerous district courts in this Circuit in allowing the SEC to bring a claim under Section 13a-14. See, e.g., SEC v. Egan, 994 F.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.