Conn. Gen. Stat. » Title 31 — LABOR · Chapter 568 — Workers' Compensation Act
Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 31-348 (2025)

Compensation insurance companies to report their risks

✓ 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
Every insurance company writing compensation insurance or its duly appointed agent shall report in writing or by other means to the chairperson of the Workers' Compensation Commission, in accordance with rules prescribed by the chairperson, the name of the person or corporation insured, including the state, the day on which the policy becomes effective and the date of its expiration, which report shall be made within fifteen days from the date of the policy. The cancellation of any policy so written and reported shall not become effective until fifteen days after notice of such cancellation has been filed with the chairperson. Any insurance company violating any provision of this section shall be fined not less than one hundred nor more than one thousand dollars for each offense.

(1949 Rev., S. 7488; 1958 Rev., S. 31-215; 1961, P.A. 491, S. 74; P.A. 81-469, S. 2, 8; P.A. 90-116, S. 10; P.A. 91-339, S. 35, 55; P.A. 22-89, S. 28.)

History: 1961 act entirely replaced previous provisions; P.A. 81-469 required any insurance company insuring the state's liability under this chapter to report such fact as it would for any other policyholder; P.A. 90-116 allowed for reports from agents of companies and for reports other than in writing; P.A. 91-339 changed “board of commissioners” to “chairman of the workers' compensation commission” and “one week” to “fifteen days”; P.A. 22-89 made technical changes, effective May 24, 2022.

Former statute cited. 113 C. 128; 127 C. 706.

Insurer's initial letter to insured indicating that failure to pay premiums due would result in policy cancellation was not sufficiently unequivocal to constitute notice of cancellation under section. 62 CA 440. Section not applicable to nonrenewals of policies. 67 CA 361. Workers' Compensation Commission's longstanding policy of utilizing National Council on Compensation Insurance to collect notices electronically of compensation policy coverage and cancellations is authorized by section. 206 CA 702.

Cited. 28 CS 5.

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

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1967–2024 · leading case: Dengler v. Special Attention Health Servs., Inc., 774 A.2d 992 (Conn. App. Ct. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Dengler v. Special Attention Health Servs., Inc., 774 A.2d 992 (Conn. App. Ct. 2001). · cites it 7× “The commissioner applied General Statutes § 31-348 5 and concluded that the trust’s cancellation did not take effect until August 31, 1996, fifteen days after the trust’s notice of cancellation.”
Dibello v. Barnes Page Wire Prods., Inc., 786 A.2d 1234 (Conn. App. Ct. 2001). · cites it 34× “The defendant claims on appeal that the board improperly affirmed the *363 commissioner’s decision because (1) the defendant’s insurer failed to comply with the cancellation notice requirements of General Statutes § 31-348, (2) the defendant’s insurer waived the right to contest…”
Bellerive v. Grotto, Inc., 260 A.3d 1228 (Conn. App. Ct. 2021). · cites it 16× “1 General Statutes § 31-348 provides in relevant part: ‘‘Every insurance company writing compensation insurance or its duly appointed agent shall report in writing or by other means to the chairman of the Workers’ Compensation Commission, in accordance with rules prescribed by…”
Yelunin v. Royal Ride Transp., 994 A.2d 305 (Conn. App. Ct. 2010). · cites it 7× “The fund claims that “pursuant to [General Statutes §§ 31-348 and 31-321], [an] insurance carrier must give [an] insured notice of [an] intended policy cancellation.”
Stickney v. Sunlight Constr., Inc., 730 A.2d 630 (Conn. 1999). · cites it 3× “to 1985) § 31-348. “Subsequent to Aetna’s cancellation, Sunlight procured workers’ compensation insurance from Commercial Union.”
Napolitano v. Ace Am. Ins. Co., 328 A.3d 635 (Conn. 2024). · cites it 35× “To comply with § 31-348, the cancellation notice must specify ‘‘an ascertainable date and time when cancellation will occur, not a specific date and time when cancellation might become effective if certain events do or do not transpire.”
DiBello v. Barnes Page Wire Prods., Inc., 796 A.2d 560 (Conn. 2002). · cites it 2× “361 (AC 20612), is granted, limited to the following issue: “Did the Appellate Court properly affirm the decision of the compensation review board affirming the finding of the worker’s compensation commissioner that the notice by Aetna Casualty and Surety Company to its insured…”
Stickney v. Sunlight Constr., Inc., 711 A.2d 1193 (Conn. App. Ct. 1998). · cites it 3× “to 1985) § 31-348. 4 Subsequent to Aetna’s cancellation, Sunlight procured workers’ compensation insurance from Commercial Union.”
Bartolotta v. United States, 276 F. Supp. 66 (D. Conn. 1967). “one sent to employer and insurer to be party to the hearing); § 31-343 (certain defenses not available to insurer against an employee); § 31-344 (limitation on the representation which will vitiate policy as between the insurer and insured) ; § 31-346 (damages to insurer for…”
Ed Constr., Inc. v. CNA Ins., 24 A.3d 1 (Conn. App. Ct. 2011). · cites it 2× “, General Statutes § 31-348 (“[t]he cancellation of any policy so written and reported shall not become effective until fifteen days after notice of such cancellation has been filed with the chairman [of the workers’ compensation commission]”).”
Grotto, Inc. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 321 A.3d 507 (Conn. App. Ct. 2024). · cites it 8× “Liberty Mutual filed the cancellation 1 General Statutes § 31-348 provides in relevant part: ‘‘Every insurance company writing compensation insurance or its duly appointed agent shall report in writing or by other means to the chairperson of the Workers’ Compensation Commission,…”
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.