Conn. Gen. Stat. » Title 02 — GENERAL ASSEMBLY AND LEGISLATIVE AGENCIES · Chapter 16 — General Assembly
Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 2-2 (2025)

Election by illegal practices

✓ laws through the 2024 session: the source has not yet published 2025 Public Acts (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Each person elected to either house of the General Assembly by any illegal practice shall be incapable of holding his seat unless he can show to the satisfaction of such house that he was not directly or indirectly concerned in such illegal practice.

(1949 Rev., S. 47; 1953, S. 4d.)

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)		 (Return to
List of Chapters)		 (Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case: Scalora v. Scalora, 209 A.3d 1 (Conn. App. Ct. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Scalora v. Scalora, 209 A.3d 1 (Conn. App. Ct. 2019). · cites it 2× “3 of the separation agreement, the defendant was required to pay for "the post-secondary education in college or for any further learning and training beyond high school for each child, including tuition, room, board, books, fees, clothes and necessary transportation and travel…”
Massameno v. Statewide Grievance Comm., 663 A.2d 317 (Conn. 1995). “1988) § 2-2, p. 18. Consequently, we have stated that, in deciding whether one branch’s actions violate the constitutional mandate of the separation of powers doctrine, the court will con *553 sider if the actions constitute: (1) an assumption of power that lies exclusively…”
In re Jeisean M., 852 A.2d 643 (Conn. 2004). “Consequently, the respondent contends, the trial court improperly took judicial notice of the May 17, 2001 finding. We disagree. “A party requesting the court to take judicial notice of a fact shall give timely notice of the request to all other parties.”
Simes v. Simes, 895 A.2d 852 (Conn. App. Ct. 2006). · cites it 2× “§ 2-2 (b). 14 A court may take judicial notice of the applicable tax laws.”
Wasson v. Wasson, 881 A.2d 356 (Conn. App. Ct. 2005). “§ 2-2 (b). A trial court’s determination as to *158 whether to take judicial notice is essentially an eviden-tiary ruling, subject to an abuse of discretion standard of review.”
Phillipe v. Thomas, 489 A.2d 1056 (Conn. App. Ct. 1985). “) § 2-2. The trial court only determined the good faith of the plaintiff in pursuing the mortgage commitment.”
Azia v. Dilascia, 780 A.2d 992 (Conn. App. Ct. 2001). “§ 2-2 (b). The following colloquy took place at trial: “[Child’s Attorney]: Do you have any opinion as to whether your role as a special master on October 16th of 1998 has any potential impact from a conflict perspective with the therapy sessions you have undertaken with [the…”
Byars v. City of Waterbury, 795 A.2d 630 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2001). · cites it 3× “Connecticut Code of Evidence § 2-2 prohibits this court from relying on evidence that was not made the subject of a request for judicial notice during the presentation of evidence at trial.”
Izard v. Izard, 869 A.2d 1278 (Conn. App. Ct. 2005). · cites it 3× “§ 2-2 (b). 4 The Moore court then turned to the issue of inflation.”
State v. Freeman, 281 A.3d 397 (Conn. 2022). “2d 1085 (1977) (recognizing distinction ‘‘between matters susceptible of explanation or contradiction, of which notice should not be taken without giving the affected party an opportunity to be heard .”
J. & D. Kasper Assocs. v. Merrimac Assocs., Inc., 435 A.2d 709 (Conn. Super. Ct. 1981). “*716 The plaintiff’s final claim is that even if there was no express agreement to complete an entire survey, at least there was an agreement to perform preliminary work. The court found that Mr. Ehrsam “authorized the plaintiff to do research work and other preliminary work so…”
Tonetti v. Barth, 829 A.2d 453 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2003). “§ 2-2 (court need not provide parties with notice or opportunity to be heard when taking judicial notice of “matters of established fact, the accuracy of which cannot be questioned”).”
Show all 19 citing cases →
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.