Connecticut General Statutes
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 31-290c (2026)
Fraudulent claim or receipt of benefits. Penalties
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official)
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Any person or his representative who makes or attempts to make any claim for benefits, receives or attempts to receive benefits, prevents or attempts to prevent the receipt of benefits or reduces or attempts to reduce the amount of benefits under this chapter based in whole or in part upon (1) the intentional misrepresentation of any material fact including, but not limited to, the existence, time, date, place, location, circumstances or symptoms of the claimed injury or illness or (2) the intentional nondisclosure of any material fact affecting such claim or the collection of such benefits, shall be guilty of a class C felony if the amount of benefits claimed or received, including but not limited to, the value of medical services, is less than two thousand dollars, or shall be guilty of a class B felony if the amount of such benefits exceeds two thousand dollars. Such person shall also be liable for treble damages in a civil proceeding under section 52-564.
(b) Any person, including an employer, who intentionally aids, abets, assists, promotes or facilitates the making of, or the attempt to make, any claim for benefits or the receipt or attempted receipt of benefits under this chapter by another person in violation of subsection (a) of this section shall be liable for the same criminal and civil penalties as the person making or attempting to make the claim or receiving or attempting to receive the benefits.
(P.A. 90-244.)
No indication that legislature intended statute authorizing penalties for workers' compensation fraud to encompass sanctions against employees for misrepresentations on employment applications. 244 C. 781.
Cited. 45 CA 324. Section does not afford a private right of action; rather, it confers on individuals the right to bring an action for statutory theft under Sec. 52-564. 138 CA 93.
| (Return to Chapter Table of Contents) |
(Return to List of Chapters) |
(Return to List of Titles) |
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1997–2026 · leading case: Second Injury Fund v. Lupachino, 695 A.2d 1072 (Conn. App. Ct. 1997).
Second Injury Fund v. Lupachino, 695 A.2d 1072 (Conn. App. Ct. 1997). “On or about May 25, *326 1995, the fund filed two forms pursuant to General Statutes § 31-296 1 giving notice that it intended to discontinue or reduce the defendant’s benefits.”
State v. Mungroo, 11 A.3d 132 (Conn. 2011). “The defendant, Nazra Mungroo, appeals, following our granting of certification, [1] from the judgment of the Appellate Court, which affirmed the trial court's judgment of conviction, rendered after a jury trial, of fraudulent receipt of workers' compensation benefits in…”
State v. Mungroo, 962 A.2d 797 (Conn. App. Ct. 2008). “The defendant, Nazra Mungroo, appeals from the judgment of conviction, rendered after a jury trial, of fraudulent receipt of workers’ compensation benefits in violation of General Statutes § 31-290c (a) (2). On appeal, the defendant claims that the trial court improperly (1)…”
Macdermid, Inc. v. Leonetti, 183 A.3d 611 (Conn. 2018). “The plaintiff subsequently amended its complaint on January 15, 2013, to include a sixth count, alleging that the defendant filed a fraudulent claim for workers' compensation benefits as defined in General Statutes § 31-290c. Given that the jury returned a verdict in favor of…”
Desmond v. Yale-New Haven Hosp., Inc., 50 A.3d 910 (Conn. App. Ct. 2012). “487 , and, instead, maintains that General Statutes § 31-290c establishes a civil cause of action over which the commission lacks jurisdiction.”
Dauti v. Stop & Shop Supermarket Co., 879 A.2d 507 (Conn. App. Ct. 2005). “Count one alleged that Stop & Shop was hable for the wrongful death of Zejadin Dauti, count two alleged that Stop & Shop was hable for a loss of consortium, count three alleged that all of the defendants were hable for interference with receipt of workers’ compensation benefits…”
Dowling v. Slotnik, 712 A.2d 396 (Conn. 1998). “General Statutes § 31-290c provides criminal and civil penalties for making a fraudulent claim for compensation benefits, and General Statutes § 31-290d establishes the workers’ compensation fraud unit of the chief state’s attorney’s office to investigate fraudulent claims.”
State v. Mazzeo, 811 A.2d 775 (Conn. App. Ct. 2003). “Mazzeo, appeals from the judgment of conviction, rendered after a jury trial, of fraudulent receipt of workers’ compensation benefits in violation of General Statutes § 31-290c (a) (2) and larceny in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-122.”
Xu v. Neubauer, 166 F. Supp. 3d 203 (D. Conn. 2015). “3d 910 (2012) (“Violations of § 31-290c, a criminal statute, may be prosecuted by the state’s attorney, not by private individuals.”
Desmond v. Yale-New Haven Hosp., Inc., 185 A.3d 665 (Conn. App. Ct. 2018). “and, instead, maintain[ed] that General Statutes § 31-290c establishes a civil cause of action over which the commission lacks jurisdiction.”
Reid v. Speer, 209 Conn. App. 540 (Conn. App. Ct. 2021). “1 On appeal, the defendant challenges several of the commissioner’s findings and also claims that filing a form 43 to contest liability for the plaintiff’s injury would have constituted a criminal act punishable pursuant to General Statutes § 31-290c, due to her alleged…”
Mankus v. Mankus, 946 A.2d 259 (Conn. App. Ct. 2008). “In the motion, the plaintiff alleged that the state had initiated criminal proceedings against him and that the charges included workers’ compensation fraud pursuant to General Statutes § 31-290c. According to the plaintiff, trial on these charges commenced on October 20, 2005,…”
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.