Conn. Gen. Stat. » Title 38a — INSURANCE · Chapter 704 — Unfair and Prohibited Practices

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 38a-815

(Formerly Sec. 38-60). Unfair practice prohibited

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
No person shall engage in this state in any trade practice which is defined in section 38a-816 as, or determined pursuant to sections 38a-817 and 38a-818 to be, an unfair method of competition or an unfair or deceptive act or practice in the business of insurance, nor shall any domestic insurance company engage outside of this state in any act or practice defined in subsections (1) to (12), inclusive, of section 38a-816. The commissioner shall have power to examine the affairs of every person engaged in the business of insurance in this state in order to determine whether such person has been or is engaged in any unfair method of competition or in any unfair or deceptive act or practice prohibited by sections 38a-815 to 38a-819, inclusive. When used in said sections, “person” means any individual, corporation, limited liability company, association, partnership, reciprocal exchange, interinsurer, Lloyd's insurer, fraternal benefit society and any other legal entity engaged in the business of insurance, including producers and adjusters.

(1955, S. 2816d; P.A. 73-73, S. 1; P.A. 79-318, S. 2; P.A. 95-79, S. 149, 189; P.A. 96-193, S. 18, 36.)

History: P.A. 73-73 added revised reference to include Subsecs. (6) to (11) of Sec. 38-61; P.A. 79-318 revised reference to Sec. 38-61 to include Subsec. (2); Sec. 38-60 transferred to Sec. 38a-815 in 1991; P.A. 95-79 redefined “person” to include a limited liability company, effective May 31, 1995; P.A. 96-193 substituted “producer” for “agent” and “broker”, effective June 3, 1996.

Annotations to former section 38-60:

Cited. 186 C. 507. Legislative intent is to make insurance practices subject to both the Connecticut Unfair Insurance Practices Act and the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act. 199 C. 651. Cited. 206 C. 668; 216 C. 830.

Cited. 9 CA 622; 13 CA 208.

Cited. 39 CS 206; 40 CS 299; Id., 336.

Annotations to present section:

Cited. 219 C. 644; 229 C. 842; 231 C. 756; 239 C. 658. A common-law breach of fiduciary duty arising in the insurance context that does not violate CUIPA or some other statute regulating the insurance industry cannot provide the basis for a valid CUTPA claim; legislative intent in passing CUIPA was to occupy the field with regard to unfair trade practices in the insurance industry. 310 C. 1.

Cited. 45 CA 368.

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

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 117 cases (32 in the last 5 years), 1991–2026 · leading case: Heyman Associates No. 1 v. Insurance Co. of Pennsylvania
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Heyman Associates No. 1 v. Insurance Co. of Pennsylvania (1995) conn · cites it 9× “may have had because they failed to provide the plaintiff with timely notice of their denials of coverage; (3) National Union acted in violation of the common law and General Statutes § 38a-321 6 *763 in “wrongfully] attempting] to alter and cancel the plaintiffs insurance…”
Connecticut Podiatric Medical Ass'n v. Health Net of Connecticut, Inc. (2011) conn · cites it 8× “The plaintiffs argue that the trial court improperly concluded that, as a matter of law, the defendant's practice of reimbursing the individual podiatrists at a lower rate than medical doctors for the same procedures does not constitute "unfair discrimination" in violation of…”
Dane v. UnitedHealthcare Ins. Co. (2020) ca2 · cites it 2× “Under Connecticut law, claims based on illegal insurance practices, including unlawful rebates, are governed by the Connecticut Unfair Insurance Practices Act ("CUIPA"), Conn. Gen. Stat. § 38a-815. 2 This Court has explained that: CUIPA does not provide litigants an independent…”
Mazziotti v. Allstate Insurance (1997) conn · cites it 4× “CV920330855S]; (2) failed, in bad faith, to settle Mazziotti’s claim against Ye within Patriot General’s $20,000 policy limits; (3) failed to satisfy the judgment against Ye; and (4) violated the Connecticut Unfair Insurance Practices Act (CUIPA) [General Statutes § 38a-815 et…”
Collard and Roe, PC v. Klein (2005) connappct · cites it 6× “, and the Connecticut Unfair Insurance Practices Act, General Statutes § 38a-815 et seq. 3 *344 I As a threshold matter, we address this court’s jurisdiction over this appeal.”
Hutchinson v. Farm Family Casualty Insurance (2005) conn · cites it 4× “, violations of the Connecticut Unfair Insurance Practices Act, General Statutes § 38a-815 et seq., reckless and wilful misconduct and fraud.”
Powell v. Infinity Insurance (2007) conn · cites it 2× “, and the Connecticut Unfair Insurance Practices Act (CUIPA), General Statutes § 38a-815 et seq., arose out of an automobile accident and subsequent lawsuit that was litigated to conclusion between the same parties to this action.”
Haynes v. Yale-New Haven Hospital (1997) conn · cites it 2× “See generally General Statutes § 38a-815 et seq. (Connecticut Unfair Insurance Practices Act); General Statutes § 42-110a et seq.”
Bruno v. The Travelers Companies (2017) connappct · cites it 2× “In her amended complaint, she alleged the following causes of action against the defendants: (1) breach of contract, (2) breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, (3) violation of the Connecticut Unfair Insurance Practices Act, General Statutes § 38a-815 et…”
Lees v. Middlesex Insurance (1991) conn · cites it 2× “” Section 38-60 has been renumbered] effective January, 1991, and now is found at General Statutes § 38a-815. General Statutes (Rev.”
Wilcox v. Webster Insurance, Inc. (2009) conn · cites it 2× “9 The complaint alleges causes of action against the defendant for breach of contract, promissory estoppel, negligent misrepresentation, recklessness, and violations of the Connecticut Unfair Insurance Practices Act, General Statutes § 38a-815 et seq., and the Connecticut Unfair…”
Nazami v. Patrons Mutual Insurance (2006) conn · cites it 2× “The plaintiff claims that the trial court improperly struck the second and fifth counts of her complaint because she sufficiently had alleged: (1) a cause of action against Fallon under the Connecticut Unfair Insurance Practices Act (CUIPA), General Statutes § 38a-815 et seq.,…”
Show all 117 citing cases →
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.