(a) Upon failure of any person to answer interrogatories issued pursuant to subsection (11) of section
46a-54, the commission may file a petition with the interrogatories attached with the Superior Court of the judicial district in which the violation is alleged to have occurred or where such person resides or transacts business, requesting the court to order that an answer be filed.
(b) The commission shall cause a copy of the petition provided for in subsection (a) of this section to be sent by registered or certified mail to the person from whom such answers are sought or his legal representative.
(c) The court shall assume jurisdiction over the proceedings provided for in this section and may, after hearing, or in the absence of objection, enter an order which it deems appropriate.
(d) The proceedings provided for in this section shall conform to the rules of practice of the Superior Court.
(P.A. 80-422, S. 36.)
History: (Revisor's note: In 1993 a reference in Subsec. (a) to “subsection (10) of section 46a-54” was changed editorially by the Revisors to “subsection (11) of section 46a-54” to reflect the renumbering of Sec. 46a-54 by P.A. 89-332, S. 2 in 1991).
Cited. 202 C. 601; Id., 609; 211 C. 129.
Cited. 18 CA 126.
Notes of Decisions
Comm'n on Human Rights & Opportunities v. Archdiocesan Sch. Off., 522 A.2d 781 (Conn. 1987).
· cites it 8× “The trial court granted a motion to dismiss a petition of the commission on human rights and opportunities (CHRO) that had been brought pursuant to General Statutes § 46a-88 1 to require the defendants to answer certain interrogatories relating to its investigation of a…”
Greater Bridgeport Transit Dist. v. Comm'n on Human Rights & Opportunities, 557 A.2d 925 (Conn. 1989).
· cites it 2× “” General Statutes § 46a-88 (a) provides: “Upon failure of any person to answer interrogatories issued pursuant to subsection (10) of section 46a-54, the commission may file a petition with the interrogatories attached with the superior court of the judicial district in which…”
Comm'n on Human Rights & Opportunities ex rel. Funchess v. Sullivan, 556 A.2d 636 (Conn. App. Ct. 1989).
· cites it 13× “Having received no response from the defendants’ counsel, the plaintiff, pursuant to General Statutes § 46a-88, 5 filed a peti *129 tion in Superior Court for an order requiring the named defendant to answer the interrogatories.”
Fin. Consulting, LLC v. Comm'r of Ins. (Conn. 2014).
· cites it 2× “these cases are distinguishable because, in contrast to the relatively informal second chance process that is a precursor to license revocation proceedings, they involve formal agency proceedings in the form of interrogatories that the Commission on Human Rights and…”
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.