Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 31-8 (2026)

Appeal from orders of commissioner

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Except as provided in subsections (a) and (c) of section 4-186, any person, firm or corporation aggrieved by any order of the commissioner may appeal, in accordance with the provisions of chapter 54, to the superior court for the judicial district where the person, firm or corporation owns, leases or occupies the factory or building to which such order relates.

(1949 Rev., S. 3757; 1971, P.A. 870, S. 86; P.A. 76-436, S. 616, 681; P.A. 77-603, S. 20, 125; P.A. 78-280, S. 1, 127; P.A. 88-317, S. 32, 107.)

History: 1971 act replaced superior court with court of common pleas, effective September 1, 1971, except that courts with cases pending retain jurisdiction unless pending matters deemed transferable; P.A. 76-436 replaced court of common pleas with superior court and added reference to judicial districts, effective July 1, 1978; P.A. 77-603 added specific provision applicable to appeals in contested cases; P.A. 78-280 deleted reference to counties; P.A. 88-317 substituted, in the first sentence, “as provided in subsections (a) and (c) of section 4-186” for “for an appeal in a contested case, as defined in section 4-166” and required appeal to be made “in accordance with the provisions of chapter 54” instead of specifying the deadline, form and procedure for the appeal, effective July 1, 1989, and applicable to all agency proceedings commencing on or after that date.

Cited. 164 C. 233.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 1973–1973 · leading case: Davenport Taxi, Inc. v. State Labor Comm'r, 319 A.2d 386 (Conn. 1973).
Davenport Taxi, Inc. v. State Labor Comm'r, 319 A.2d 386 (Conn. 1973). “This is an appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court in an action brought pursuant to the provisions of § 31-8 of the General Statutes where the court set aside an order of the director of the minimum wage division of the Connecticut department of labor.”
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.