Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 19a-24 (2026)

(Formerly Sec. 19-5a). Claims for damages against Commissioners of Public Health and Developmental Services and certain officials, employees, council members and trustees. Immunity. Indemnification

✓ current as of May 2026

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

Section 19a-24 is repealed, effective October 1, 2014.

(1957, P.A. 244, S. 1; September, 1957, P.A. 11, S. 31; 1959, P.A. 148, S. 18; P.A. 73-643, S. 1; P.A. 75-567, S. 74, 80; 75-638, S. 11, 23; P.A. 76-153, S. 12; 76-371, S. 3, 5; P.A. 77-614, S. 323, 610; P.A. 78-303, S. 59, 93, 136; P.A. 83-587, S. 71, 96; P.A. 86-41, S. 1, 11; P.A. 88-111; P.A. 90-230, S. 28, 101; P.A. 93-381, S. 9, 39; P.A. 95-257, S. 12, 21, 58; P.A. 99-60; P.A. 07-73, S. 2(b); P.A. 08-7, S. 4; P.A. 13-225, S. 8; P.A. 14-231, S. 72.)

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)

(Return to
List of Chapters)

(Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 10 cases, 1983–2018 · leading case: Duguay v. Hopkins, 464 A.2d 45 (Conn. 1983).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Duguay v. Hopkins, 464 A.2d 45 (Conn. 1983). · cites it 26× “2 General Statutes § 19a-24, formerly § 19-5a, as relevant here, provides as follows: “(a) Any civil action for damages on account of any official act or omission of the commissioner of health services or the commissioner of mental retardation or any member of their staffs, any…”

Canning v. Lensink, 603 A.2d 1155 (Conn. 1992). · cites it 12× “In the appeal the sole issue is whether there is a right to a jury trial in an action for damages brought against the commissioner of mental retardation pursuant to General Statutes § 19a-24. 1 We conclude that in such an action there is no such right.”

Wetzel v. Thorne, 522 A.2d 288 (Conn. 1987). · cites it 5× “To recover damages for these injuries, she and her father first filed a claim with the state claims commission and then, during the pendency of that claim, initiated a suit against the defendant in Superior Court.”

Mahoney v. Lensink, 550 A.2d 1088 (Conn. App. Ct. 1988). · cites it 2× “The defendant conceded that § 17-206c provided a direct cause of action against him and that sovereign immunity was waived by virtue of General Statutes § 19a-24, which authorizes civil actions for damages against the commissioner of health services and the commissioner of…”

Gutierrez v. Thorne, 537 A.2d 527 (Conn. App. Ct. 1988). · cites it 2× “” The defendant does not dispute that this statute provides a direct cause of action against him, and that sovereign immunity is waived by virtue of General Statutes § 19a-24. In addressing the issue of foreseeability, neither the trial court nor the parties examined the matter…”

Johnson v. Dep't of Pub. Health, 710 A.2d 176 (Conn. App. Ct. 1998). · cites it 2× “aring officer’s decision of September 7,1995, be set aside and the proceedings before the department be dismissed, that temporary and permanent injunctive relief be entered that is appropriate to protect the plaintiffs substantive and procedural rights and to effect and enforce…”

Roche v. O'MEARA, 175 F. Supp. 2d 276 (D. Conn. 2001). · cites it 13× “Count Four sets forth a claim for damages pursuant to Conn.Gen.Stat. § 19a-24. Count Five sets forth a common law claim for fraudulent inducement.”

Minotti v. Wheaton, 630 F. Supp. 280 (D. Conn. 1986). · cites it 6× “The statute reads, in relevant part: *282 Any civil action for damages on account of any official act or omission of the commissioner of health services or the commissioner of mental retardation, or any member of their staffs .”

Smith v. Rudolph, 191 A.3d 992 (Conn. 2018). “to 1987) § 19a-24 against the Commissioner of Mental Retardation and his employees in their official capacity, explaining that, "because the doctrine of sovereign immunity barred actions against the state prior to the adoption of the state constitution in 1818, there is no…”

Perez v. Univ. of Connecticut, 189 A.3d 664 (Conn. App. Ct. 2018). “Similarly, in Canning , our Supreme Court concluded that there was no right to a jury trial in a wrongful death action brought pursuant to General Statute § 19a-24 against state employees in their official capacity, reasoning that "because the doctrine of sovereign immunity…”

— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 19a-24(a) — 1 case

Minotti v. Wheaton, 630 F. Supp. 280 (D. Conn. 1986). “The statute reads, in relevant part: *282 Any civil action for damages on account of any official act or omission of the commissioner of health services or the commissioner of mental retardation, or any member of their staffs .”

— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 19a-24(c) — 1 case

Roche v. O'MEARA, 175 F. Supp. 2d 276 (D. Conn. 2001). “Count Four sets forth a claim for damages pursuant to Conn.Gen.Stat. § 19a-24. Count Five sets forth a common law claim for fraudulent inducement.”

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.