Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 31-7 (2026)

Notices

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The orders and notices given by the Labor Commissioner under the provisions of this chapter shall be written or printed, signed by him officially, and may be served by him or any proper officer or indifferent person, by leaving an attested copy thereof with or at the usual place of abode of the person upon whom service is to be made, or by registered or certified mail addressed to such person at his last-known place of address. Such notice, properly endorsed with the doings of the person or officer serving the same, shall be returned to the commissioner and shall be prima facie evidence that notice was given as therein appears. Notice to one member of a firm shall be notice to every member thereof, and notice to the president, secretary or treasurer of a corporation shall be notice to such corporation. The fees for serving such orders and notices, unless served by the commissioner, shall be the same as for the service of process in civil actions, and shall be included in the necessary expenses of the commissioner.

(1949 Rev., S. 3756.)

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)

(Return to
List of Chapters)

(Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 2008–2008 · leading case: Weems v. Citigroup, Inc., 961 A.2d 349 (Conn. 2008).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Weems v. Citigroup, Inc., 961 A.2d 349 (Conn. 2008). “The plaintiffs claim that their pay stubs prove that the payroll plan was funded by deductions from the amount paid as “cash *783 compensation” for the relevant pay period, compensation for which ordinarily would be due in full under § 31-7!c upon the termination of their…”

State v. Lynch, 948 A.2d 1026 (Conn. 2008). · cites it 2× “The defendant claims that, because he presented evidence that he had such an agreement with his employees, the trial court improperly: (1) refused to instruct the jury that if that evidence was credible, the defendant should be absolved of criminal liability; and (2) concluded,…”

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.