Conn. Gen. Stat. » Title 22 — AGRICULTURE. DOMESTIC ANIMALS · Chapter 422 — Department of Agriculture
Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 22-9 (2026)

Supervision of institutional farms

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The commissioner shall exercise such authority and control over the policies and operations, including financial operations, of the various state-owned institutional farms, except those of The University of Connecticut and the state agricultural experiment stations, as he deems necessary in the interest of efficient and economical operation of the same and in the best interests of the state.

(1949 Rev., S. 3055.)

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

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 23 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1999–2021 · leading case: Sw. Appraisal Grp., LLC v. Adm'r, Unemployment Comp. Act, 155 A.3d 738 (Conn. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Sw. Appraisal Grp., LLC v. Adm'r, Unemployment Comp. Act, 155 A.3d 738 (Conn. 2017). “The ABC test is set forth in General Statutes § 31-222 (a) (1) (B) (ii), which defines the term "employment" to include, in part, services performed by "any individual who, under either common law rules applicable in determining the employer-employee relationship or under the…”
Belica v. Adm'r, Unemployment Comp. Act, 12 A.3d 1067 (Conn. App. Ct. 2011). · cites it 2× “It considers *786 no evidence other than that certified to it by the board, and then for the limited purpose of determining whether .”
Fullerton v. Adm'r, 911 A.2d 736 (Conn. 2006). “” Practice Book § 22-9 (a). Consequently, there is no authority under the statutes or rules of practice that would permit the trial court to hear a claim, on appeal from the decision of the boar d, challenging the validity of the regulations.”
Shah v. Adm'r, Unemployment Comp. Act, 968 A.2d 971 (Conn. App. Ct. 2009). “It considers no evidence other than that certified to it by the board, and then for the limited purpose of determining whether .”
Ray v. Adm'r, Unemployment Comp., 36 A.3d 269 (Conn. App. Ct. 2012). “” Subsection xi of § 31-237g-34 (c) of the regulations included factors to be considered in determining whether good faith error in untimely filing constitutes good cause for tardiness.”
Marquand v. Adm'r, Unemployment Comp. Act, 3 A.3d 172 (Conn. App. Ct. 2010). “Practice Book § 519 [now § 22-9]. The court is bound by the findings of subordinate facts and reasonable factual conclusions made by the appeals referee where .”
Tosado v. Adm'r, Unemployment Comp. Act, 22 A.3d 675 (Conn. App. Ct. 2011). “” Practice Book § 22-9 (a). It is undisputed that the plaintiff did not file a motion to correct the board’s findings in the present case.”
Mayo v. Adm'r, Unemployment Comp. Act, 44 A.3d 883 (Conn. App. Ct. 2012). · cites it 2× “It considers no evidence other than that certified to it by the board, and then for the limited purpose of determining whether . . . there was any evidence to support in law the conclusions reached.”
Addona v. Adm'r, Unemployment Comp. Act, 996 A.2d 280 (Conn. App. Ct. 2010). “Practice Book § 519 [now § 22-9]. The court is bound by the findings of subordinate facts and reasonable factual conclusions made by the appeals referee where, as here, the board of review adopted the findings and affirmed the decision of the referee.”
Pajor v. Adm'r, Unemployment Comp. Act, 165 A.3d 265 (Conn. App. Ct. 2017). · cites it 5× “Practice Book § 22-9 (b) provides: "Corrections by the court of the board's finding will only be made upon the refusal to find a material fact which was an admitted or undisputed fact, upon the finding of a fact in language of doubtful meaning so that its real significance may…”
Adm'r, Unemployment Comp. Act v. Moffett, 760 A.2d 1287 (Conn. Super. Ct. 1999). · cites it 2× “Pursuant to Practice Book § 22-9, “[s]uch appeals are heard by the court upon the certified copy of the record filed by the board.”
Mendes v. Adm'r, Unemployment Comp. Act, 199 Conn. App. 25 (Conn. App. Ct. 2020). · cites it 3× “Practice Book § 22-9 [(a)].’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.”
Show all 23 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.