Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 47a-35 (2026)

(Formerly Sec. 52-542). Stay of execution. Appeal

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Execution shall be stayed for five days from the date judgment has been rendered, provided any Sunday or legal holiday intervening shall be excluded in computing such five days.

(b) No appeal shall be taken except within such five-day period. If an appeal is taken within such period, execution shall be stayed until the final determination of the cause, unless it appears to the judge who tried the case that the appeal was taken solely for the purpose of delay or unless the defendant fails to give bond, as provided in section 47a-35a. If execution has not been stayed, as provided in this subsection, execution may then issue, except as otherwise provided in sections 47a-36 to 47a-41, inclusive.

(1949 Rev., S. 8283; 1949, S. 3221d; 1957, P.A. 291, S. 4; 1959, P.A. 28, S. 132; 1961, P.A. 509, S. 4; 1969, P.A. 296; 1971, P.A. 316; P.A. 76-95, S. 25, 27; P.A. 76-435, S. 75, 82; P.A. 79-571, S. 60; P.A. 80-399, S. 7; P.A. 96-74, S. 3.)

History: 1959 act deleted reference to trial justice and alternate trial justice which were abolished; 1961 act substituted the taking of an appeal for procuring a writ of error, deleted forty-eight-hour time limit for appeal and stay of execution during same, added execution be stayed for five days from judgment and added provision re effect of appeal on execution; 1969 act specified that bond be given “within the period allowed for taking such appeal or within three days from the fixing of the bond, whichever is later”, that court is responsible for fixing bond and that bond answers for rents or reasonable value for use and occupancy accruing from commencement of action to date of judgment; 1971 act specified applicability to defendants “occupying an apartment in a tenement house as defined in chapter 352”, deleted reference to bonds given within three days from fixing of bond and reworded provisions, specifying that in other appeal court “may fix a sufficient bond with surety to the adverse party”; P.A. 76-95 referred to dwelling units rather than to apartments in tenement houses, deleted reference to bonds quartering rents accruing from commencement of action to date of judgment and to rents due at time of appeal's disposal, added proviso re payments for fair rental value for use and occupancy during pendency of appeal, allowed payments in monthly installments and added provisions re determination of amounts due to parties upon final disposition of appeal; P.A. 76-435 revised effective date section of P.A. 76-95; Sec. 52-542 transferred to Sec. 47a-35 in 1977 and internal references to other sections revised as necessary to reflect their transfer; P.A. 79-571 deleted provisions re bonds and determination and distribution of amounts due to parties, reincorporating them as Secs. 47a-35a and 47a-35b; P.A. 80-399 added provisions re stays of execution in cases involving nonpayment of rent; P.A. 96-74 designated existing provisions re automatic stay of execution as Subsec. (a) and deleted provisions authorizing a defendant in an action for nonpayment of rent to apply for an additional stay of execution not exceeding three months upon the deposit of the full arrearage with the clerk of the court and requiring the clerk to distribute such arrearage, said provisions being reenacted in Sec. 47a-37 by same public act, and designated existing provisions re taking of an appeal as Subsec. (b) and rephrased provisions.

Annotations to former section 52-542:

If, after lessee is put out on execution, judgment is reversed on error, during the term of the lease, he may claim a writ of restitution. 12 C. 539. The cause cannot after a reversal be retained for trial in the Superior Court. 39 C. 307. Applies to writ of error from city court to Supreme Court. 79 C. 308. Plaintiff may have writ of error; quaere, as to right of defendant to bring after 48 hours. 86 C. 35. Bill of exceptions may be allowed and writ issued after 48 hours. Cited. 92 C. 150; 95 C. 281. Statute must be followed; injunction against landlord will not lie in absence of fraud, accident or mistake. 96 C. 630. Cited. 97 C. 123; 114 C. 584. Bond would continue to apply during period when appeal from decision on writ of error might be pending before Supreme Court. 125 C. 548. Cited. 131 C. 530; 134 C. 652. Not a statute of limitations; sole purpose is to stay execution to give tenant an opportunity to institute writ of error. 137 C. 635.

Section imposes strict limitations upon resort to writ of error. 15 CS 143. Cited. 19 CS 40; 22 CS 470. Bond executed by stranger to the action does not comply with requirements of statute. 23 CS 196. Appeal period not tolled by motion to open judgment or motion to stay execution. 30 CS 580. Appeal bond requirement cannot be waived. 33 CS 15. This section, not Sec. 52-6a, controls time limit for appeals by either party. Id., 522. Section not a denial of equal protection or due process of law. Id., 531.

Cited. 3 Conn. Cir. Ct. 561. Appeal must be taken within period of 5 days from date of judgment, day that judgment was rendered being excluded from count of days. 5 Conn. Cir. Ct. 265. Bond requirement does not violate equal protection clause of federal and state constitutions as to indigent defendants. Id., 282. Plaintiff's motion to dismiss appeal for failure of defendant to file bond granted, and defendant's motion to determine bond not considered as Appellate Court has no authority to fix bond. Id., 350. Cited. 6 Conn. Cir. Ct. 2. After commencement of hearing on merits, plaintiff may withdraw action only by leave of trial court for cause shown; motion for leave to withdraw action should be addressed to trial court and not to appellate division. Id., 168. Limit of 5 days to appeal summary process judgment acts as general limit to general 14-day right under Sec. 51-265. Id., 529, 530.

Annotations to present section:

Cited. 225 C. 757. Legislature intended the 5-day time limitation as jurisdictional prerequisite to an appeal from housing court ruling in a summary process eviction proceeding. 235 C. 650.

Cited. 5 CA 153; 40 CA 553; 45 CA 324. Appeal period set forth in statute is applicable to landlords and tenants alike, and motion to reargue filed outside of the statutory five day appeal period does not give rise to a new appeal period. 211 CA 528.

Filing time extended when fifth day falls on a day when clerk's office closed. 36 CS 541. Cited. Id., 623; Id., 626; 37 CS 645, 646; 38 CS 70.

Subsec. (b):

The phrase “[n]o appeal shall be taken except within such five-day period” refers only to appeals from judgments of possession. 218 CA 206.

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)

(Return to
List of Chapters)

(Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 28 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1980–2026 · leading case: Young v. Young, 733 A.2d 835 (Conn. 1999).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Young v. Young, 733 A.2d 835 (Conn. 1999). · cites it 28× “In doing so, we are guided by well established principles of statutory construction.”

Hud/Barbour-Waverly v. Wilson, 668 A.2d 1309 (Conn. 1995). · cites it 11× “The sole issue in this certified appeal 1 is whether, in an appeal from a judgment of possession in a summary process eviction proceeding, the failure of the defendant to comply with the five day time limit specified by General Statutes § 47a-35 deprived the *652 Appellate Court…”

Hous. Auth. v. Parks, 211 Conn. App. 528 (Conn. App. Ct. 2022). · cites it 18× “The defendant, Daryl Parks, moves to dismiss this appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction on the ground that the plaintiff failed to timely appeal from the judgment of dismissal pursuant to General Statutes § 47a-35. The plaintiff opposes the motion on the grounds that…”

Decorso v. Calderaro, 985 A.2d 349 (Conn. App. Ct. 2009). · cites it 5× “With respect to summary process actions, General Statutes § 47a-35 provides in relevant part: “(a) Execution shall be stayedforfive days from the date judgment has been rendered, provided any Sunday or legal holiday intervening shall be excluded in computing such five days, (b)…”

Second Injury Fund v. Lupachino, 695 A.2d 1072 (Conn. App. Ct. 1997). · cites it 4× “to 1993) § 47a-35 10 deprived this court of *334 subject matter jurisdiction.”

Stec v. Raymark Indus., Inc., 10 A.3d 1 (Conn. 2010). · cites it 3× “2d 1309 (1995), this court concluded that the five day time limit to appeal set forth in General Statutes § 47a-35 was a jurisdictional prerequisite to taking an appeal from a housing court ruling in a summary process eviction proceeding.”

Hous. Auth. of City of New Haven v. Deroche, 962 A.2d 904 (Conn. App. Ct. 2009). · cites it 3× “See General Statutes §§ 47a-35 and 47a-35a. The plaintiff further claimed that as a result of the defendant’s failure to comply with this statutory requirement, her appeal should be dismissed.”

Hous. Auth. v. Lamothe, 627 A.2d 367 (Conn. 1993). · cites it 2× “General Statutes § 47a-42. Because we find this potential collateral and adverse consequence sufficient to overcome the plaintiffs mootness challenge, we do not address the issue of whether a tenant seeking to challenge an eviction ruling on appeal, in order to avoid a dismissal…”

MacCio v. Hundley, 422 A.2d 953 (Conn. Super. Ct. 1980). · cites it 6× “General Statutes § 47a-35, as amended by Public Acts 1979, No.”

Scagnelli v. Donovan, 871 A.2d 1084 (Conn. App. Ct. 2005). · cites it 4× “If the defendant fails either to post a bond or to move for use and occupancy payments in lieu of bond during the five day appeal period prescribed by General Statutes § 47a-35 (a), the judgment of eviction is not stayed and the judgment may be executed.”

Purtill v. Cook, 197 Conn. App. 22 (Conn. App. Ct. 2020). · cites it 4× “This court granted review and vacated the trial court’s order, noting that an automatic stay arose under General Statutes § 47a-35. On January 22, 2019, the plaintiff filed a motion to vacate that automatic stay, claiming that (1) the defen- dant’s appeal was taken solely for…”

Yankee Sailing Co. v. Yankee Harbor Marina, Inc., 497 A.2d 93 (Conn. App. Ct. 1985). · cites it 4× “At oral argument, the landlords conceded that the trial court erred in the equitable action in finding for them on their counterclaim on the basis of use and occupancy.”

Show all 28 citing cases →

— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 47a-35(b) — 1 case

Gorawara v. Caprio (D. Conn. 2021).

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.