(a) State forest fire control personnel and district and deputy fire wardens shall, under the supervision of the State Forest Fire Warden, use all necessary means to prevent and extinguish forest fires.
(b) Such state forest fire control personnel shall assist the fire chief or the fire officer-in-charge in the control and direction of all persons and apparatus while engaged in extinguishing forest fires in their respective districts, or in other districts under the instructions of the State Forest Fire Warden.
(c) Such state forest fire control personnel and fire wardens may destroy fences, plow land or, in an emergency, close roads, with or without detours, and set backfires to hasten the control of any fire.
(d) If the state forest fire warden determines that additional state forest fire control personnel are required to assist in extinguishing a forest fire in this state or in another state that is a member of a compact authorized to provide reciprocal aid, the state forest fire warden may temporarily supplement state forest fire control personnel with temporary emergency workers who meet the training and qualification requirements of the National Incident Management System: Wildland Fire Qualification System Guide published by the National Wildfire Coordinating Group, as amended from time to time. The Department of Administrative Services shall assist the state forest fire warden in developing appropriate classifications for such temporary emergency workers.
(e) No action for trespass shall lie against any person crossing or working upon lands of another to extinguish fire or for investigation thereof.
(1949 Rev., S. 3477; 1949, S. 1877d; P.A. 74-83, S. 2; P.A. 81-354, S. 3, 4; P.A. 96-180, S. 88, 166; P.A. 00-99, S. 67, 154; P.A. 01-150, S. 7; P.A. 19-37, S. 1; P.A. 22-143, S. 5; P.A. 23-85, S. 1.)
History: P.A. 74-83 allowed summons of any resident qualified with regard to age for fire-fighting duties, rather than any “male” resident in Subsec. (d); P.A. 81-354 changed title of forest rangers to state forest fire control personnel; P.A. 96-180 deleted obsolete Subsec. (g), which had empowered district fire wardens to collect expenses incurred in fire extinguishing for state, effective June 3, 1996; P.A. 00-99 deleted reference to powers of deputy sheriff in Subsec. (f), effective December 1, 2000; P.A. 01-150 deleted reference to state forest fire control personnel and district and deputy fire wardens enforcing all statutes for the protection of forest and timber land from fire from Subsec. (a), amended Subsec. (b) to require state forest fire control personnel to assist the fire chief or fire officer-in-charge, amended Subsec. (d) by substituting “equipment” for “horses” and “wagons” in extinguishing fires, increased the fine for failing to assist or interfering in the containment of a fire to $200 and deleted Subsec. (f) concerning the arrest powers of state forest fire control personnel; P.A. 19-37 deleted Subsec. (d) re authority of state forest fire control personnel to summon residents to assist in extinguishing fires and use equipment, motor vehicles and other property for such purpose, added new Subsec. (d) re authority of state forest fire warden to supplement personnel with temporary emergency workers and development of appropriate classifications for temporary emergency workers, effective July 1, 2019; P.A. 22-143 amended Subsec. (d) to add reference to extinguishment of a forest fire in another state that is a member of a compact authorized to provide reciprocal aid, effective May 31, 2022; P.A. 23-85 amended Subsec. (d) to replace reference to state fire warden with state forest fire warden.
Cited. 119 C. 602.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
14
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 2004–2025 · leading case:
White v. Comm'r of Corr., 154 A.3d 1054 (Conn. App. Ct. 2017).
White v. Comm'r of Corr., 154 A.3d 1054 (Conn. App. Ct. 2017).
· cites it 3× “On February 5, 2015, the petitioner filed a motion for summary judgment on his amended petition pursuant to Practice Book § 23-37, 5 which was accompanied by a memorandum of law in support.”
Parker v. Comm'r of Corr., 149 A.3d 174 (Conn. App. Ct. 2016).
· cites it 3× “On November 13, 2013, the respondent filed a motion for summary judgment, pursuant to Practice Book § 23-37, 6 in which he alleged both that the third amended petition was a successive petition and that the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel barred the claims…”
Lebron v. Comm'r of Corr., 175 A.3d 46 (Conn. App. Ct. 2017).
· cites it 2× “Nevertheless, we note that the statutory requirement that petitioners seek certification prior to the filing of an appeal with this court is found in subsection (g) of § 52-470, which provides that certification is required for appeals "from the judgment rendered in a habeas…”
Logan v. Comm'r of Corr., 9 A.3d 776 (Conn. App. Ct. 2010).
· cites it 2× “On June 13, 2008, the respondent, pursuant to Practice Book § 23-37, 5 filed a motion for summary judgment with respect to counts one through five of the petition.”
AvalonBay Communities, Inc. v. Sewer Comm'n, 853 A.2d 497 (Conn. 2004).
· cites it 2× “Under § 23-37 11 of the Milford code, AvalonBay already was responsible for the complete cost of connecting its proposed development to the sewer system.”
Evanuska v. City of Danbury, 939 A.2d 1174 (Conn. 2008).
· cites it 2× ““(f) Any member of a volunteer fire company or department and any person summoned by the State Forest Fire Warden or by any state forest fire personnel or district or deputy fire warden under the supervision of the State Forest Fire Warden pursuant to section 23-37, who performs…”
Davis v. Comm'r of Corr., 37 A.3d 758 (Conn. App. Ct. 2012).
· cites it 2× “On December 10, 2008, the respondent filed a motion for summary judgment, pursuant to Practice Book § 23-37, arguing that the petition was barred by res judicata because the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit addressed an identical claim from the petitioner in…”
Rios v. Comm'r of Corr., 224 Conn. App. 350 (Conn. App. Ct. 2024).
“Regarding the court’s denial of the respondent’s motion to dismiss, Practice Book § 23-29 provides in relevant part that ‘‘[t]he judicial authority may, at any time, upon its own motion or upon motion of the respon- dent, dismiss the petition, or any count thereof, if it…”
Lawrence v. Comm'r of Corr., 9 A.3d 772 (Conn. App. Ct. 2010).
· cites it 2× “Practice Book § 23-37 provides in relevant part that a habeas court may grant summary judgment “if the pleadings, affidavits and any other evidence submitted show that there is no genuine issue of material fact between the parties requiring a trial and the moving party is…”
Rogers v. Comm'r of Corr., 70 A.3d 1068 (Conn. App. Ct. 2013).
“The court denied both motions, without prejudice, in order for the parties to close the pleadings as required by Practice Book § 23-37. The parties then closed the pleadings and filed the same motions for summary judgment.”
Stevenson v. Comm'r of Corr., 231 Conn. App. 262 (Conn. App. Ct. 2025).
· cites it 2× “’’ 6 Practice Book § 23-37 provides: ‘‘At any time after the pleadings are closed, any party may move for summary judgment, which shall be rendered if the pleadings, affidavits and any other evidence submitted show that there is no genuine issue of material fact between the…”
State v. Douglas C. (Conn. 2023).
“2 Like Practice Book § 23-29, Practice Book § 23-37, which governs sum- mary judgment in habeas actions, does not, by its terms, provide for a hearing as of right.”
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.