Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 47-59 (2026)

Overseer of Indians

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Section 47-59 is repealed.

(1949 Rev., S. 7168; 1961, P.A. 304, S. 6.)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1976–1996 · leading case: Romanella v. Hayward, 933 F. Supp. 163 (D. Conn. 1996).
Romanella v. Hayward, 933 F. Supp. 163 (D. Conn. 1996). · cites it 2× “See also Conn.Gen.Stat. § 47-59(a) (stating that “all resident Indians .”
Schaghticoke Indians of Kent, Connecticut, Inc. v. Potter, 587 A.2d 139 (Conn. 1991). · cites it 2× “The predecessor of General Statutes § 47-59 in effect in 1953 gave the welfare commissioner responsibility over the Schaghticoke Indians.”
Rolling Cloud v. Gill, 412 F. Supp. 1085 (D. Conn. 1976). · cites it 2× “Conn.Gen.Stat.Ann. § 47-59b(a). Prior to the creation of this Council, Indian activities in Connecticut were confided exclusively to the state Commissioner of Welfare.”
Schaghticoke Indians of Kent v. Potter, 577 A.2d 719 (Conn. App. Ct. 1990). · cites it 5× “304, 9 which replaced former General Statutes § 47-59, provided in relevant part: “The welfare commissioner shall have the care and management of lands and buildings on reservations and the general care and management of all persons residing on such reservations.”
— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 47-59(a) — 1 case
Romanella v. Hayward, 933 F. Supp. 163 (D. Conn. 1996). “See also Conn.Gen.Stat. § 47-59(a) (stating that “all resident Indians .”
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.