Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42-110h

Class actions

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
As soon as practicable after the commencement of an action brought as a class action, the court shall determine by order whether it is to be so maintained. An order under this section may be conditional, and it may be amended before decision on the merits. An order issued under this section shall be immediately appealable by either party.

(P.A. 73-615, S. 8, 16; P.A. 84-468, S. 3, 10; P.A. 00-196, S. 59.)

History: P.A. 84-468 deleted former Subsecs. (a), (b) and (d) to (h), inclusive, detailing procedure for class actions; P.A. 00-196 made a technical change.

Cited. 186 C. 507; 241 C. 278.

Cited. 23 CA 585.

Cited. 42 CS 198.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1986–2024 · leading case: Collins v. Anthem Health Plans, Inc.
Collins v. Anthem Health Plans, Inc. (2003) conn · cites it 4× “7 The plaintiffs have moved to dismiss the defendant’s appeal “insofar as [it] purports to raise nonCUTPA issues,” on the basis that General Statutes § 42-110h 8 only provides for the interlocutory appeal of class certification orders entered in CUTPA actions.”
Palmer v. Friendly Ice Cream Corp. (2008) conn · cites it 2× “3; see General Statutes § 42-110h; see also footnote 12 of this opinion.”
Rivera v. Veterans Memorial Medical Center (2003) conn · cites it 2× “See General Statutes § 42-110h (“[a]n order issued under this section shall be immediately appealable by either party”).”
Standard Petroleum Co. v. Faugno Acquisition, LLC (2018) conn · cites it 2× “The defendant appealed from the class certification orders to the Appellate Court, and we transferred the appeal to this court pursuant to General Statutes § 51-199 (c) and Practice Book § 65-1.”
Russell v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. (1986) conn ““(b) Persons entitled to bring an action under subsection (a) of this section may, pursuant to section 42-110h bring a class action on behalf of themselves and other persons similarly situated who are residents of this state or injured in this state to recover damages.”
Neighborhood Builders, Inc. v. Town of Madison (2010) conn · cites it 2× “In the present case, the town appeals from the trial court’s order granting the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification pursuant to General Statutes § 42-110h. 15 In their memorandum of law in support of that motion, the plaintiffs argued that their claims satisfied the…”
In re Grand Theft Auto Video Game Consumer Litigation (2008) nysd “, Conn. Gen.Stat. Ann. § 42-110h (West 2007) (contemplating maintenance of consumer-fraud class action); Utah Code Ann.”
Rodriguez v. Kaiaffa, LLC (2020) conn · cites it 2× “2d 731 (2003); we have not specifically decided whether a trial court’s order granting class certification is appealable outside of the appellate review permitted by General Statutes § 42-110h for class actions brought under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act.”
Walsh v. National Safety Associates, Inc. (1997) conn · cites it 2× “The defendant appealed the class certification under the provisions of General Statutes § 42-110h, which provides: “Class actions.”
Salmonsen v. CGD, INC. (2008) sc “§ 13-20-901 (2006)(Colorado); Conn. Gen.Stat. Ann. § 42-110h (2007) (Connecticut); Fla.”
Arduini v. Automobile Insurance (1990) connappct · cites it 4× “The trial court denied class certification and the plaintiff appealed from that ruling pursuant to General Statutes § 42-110h. The plaintiff thereafter moved for the trial court to reconsider its ruling on the denial of class certification.”
Robichaud v. Hewlett Packard Co. (2004) connappct · cites it 2× “An order denying class certification for an action under CUTPA is an appealable final order under General Statutes § 42-110h, which provides: “As soon as practicable after the commencement of an action brought as *851 a class action, the court shall determine by order whether it…”
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.