Conn. Gen. Stat. » Title 04 — MANAGEMENT OF STATE AGENCIES · Chapter 50 — Office of Policy and Management: General Provisions; Budget and Appropriations; State Planning
Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 4-100 (2026)

Penalty for exceeding appropriations; exceptions

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Whenever any specific appropriation of money has been made by the General Assembly or by any community or corporation as provided in section 7-121, each agent, commissioner or executive officer of the state, except as provided in sections 4-87 and 4-99, or of any town, city, borough or school district, who wilfully authorizes or contracts for the expenditure of any money or the creation of any debt for any purpose in excess of the amount specifically appropriated for such purpose by the General Assembly or the community or corporation of which he is agent, commissioner or executive officer, unless such expenditure is made or debt contracted for the necessary repair of roads or bridges, or the necessary support of schools or paupers, in cases arising after the proper appropriation has been exhausted, shall be fined not more than one thousand dollars or imprisoned in a community correctional center not more than one year or both.

(1949 Rev., S. 271; 1959, P.A. 152, S. 6; 1969, P.A. 297.)

History: 1959 act deleted references to county appropriations; 1969 act replaced jails with community correctional centers.

Penalty attaches only when a specific appropriation has been made and exceeded. 58 C. 462. Does not apply to governmental duty of municipality, or holding election. 89 C. 563; 96 C. 7. Payment to materialman not a violation of section where amount appropriated has been paid to contractor. 109 C. 558. Cited. 111 C. 515; 193 C. 670; 200 C. 386.

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

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1984–1996 · leading case: Pellegrino v. O'Neill, 480 A.2d 476 (Conn. 1984).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Pellegrino v. O'Neill, 480 A.2d 476 (Conn. 1984). · cites it 2× “General Statutes § 4-100. “In the establishment of three distinct departments of government the Constitution, by necessary implication, prescribes those limitations and imposes those duties which are essential to the independence of each and to the performance by each of the…”
Capers v. Lee, 684 A.2d 696 (Conn. 1996). · cites it 2× “General Statutes § 4-100 provides in pertinent part: “Authorization of actions against the state, (a) When the claims commissioner deems it just and equitable, he may authorize suit against the state on any claim which, in his opinion, presents an issue of law or fact under…”
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.