Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 48-17b (2026)

Inverse condemnation. Plaintiff's award

✓ current as of May 2026

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

The state court rendering a judgment for the plaintiff in an inverse condemnation proceeding brought against the state by the owner of real property, or the Attorney General effecting a settlement of any such proceeding, shall determine and award or allow to such plaintiff, as a part of such judgment or settlement, such sum as will in the opinion of the court or the Attorney General reimburse such plaintiff for his reasonable costs, disbursements and expenses, including reasonable attorney, appraisal and engineering fees, actually incurred because of such proceeding.

(1971, P.A. 518, S. 2.)

If there was no taking in the constitutional sense, plaintiff has no right of direct action against defendants and consequently, it was not entitled to any damages for inverse condemnation proceedings as contemplated by section; provisions for damages for inverse condemnation proceedings. 169 C. 195. Cited. Id., 247; 180 C. 11; 187 C. 171; 236 C. 710.

Cited. 3 CA 329. Section applies to a redevelopment agency under Ch. 130 because it is an agent of the state. 51 CA 262.

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)

(Return to
List of Chapters)

(Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 10 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1975–2025 · leading case: Cumberland Farms, Inc. v. Town of Groton, 808 A.2d 1107 (Conn. 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Cumberland Farms, Inc. v. Town of Groton, 808 A.2d 1107 (Conn. 2002). · cites it 6× “518, § 2, codified at General Statutes § 48-17b. Even after the legislature granted such authority, however, this court noted that injunctive relief ordinarily would be the proper remedy.”

Citino v. Redevelopment Agency, 721 A.2d 1197 (Conn. App. Ct. 1998). · cites it 8× “The plaintiff claims that he should have been awarded appraiser’s fees and attorney’s fees, and he argues that General Statutes § 48-17b 16 or § 8-133 17 should be applied.”

City of Bristol v. Tilcon Minerals, Inc., 931 A.2d 237 (Conn. 2007). · cites it 5× “Tilcon cross appeals from the trial court’s judgment denying its request for reasonable attorney’s, appraisal and engineering fees pursuant to General Statutes § 48-17b 4 in the inverse condemnation action.”

Laurel, Inc. v. State, 362 A.2d 1383 (Conn. 1975). · cites it 6× “The court, after awarding damages under General Statutes § 48-17b for inverse condemnation, ordered the defendants to take all of the plaintiff’s property by condemnation.”

M. Dematteo Constr. Co. v. City of New London, 674 A.2d 845 (Conn. 1996). · cites it 2× “nce of highway, court shall award property owner reasonable appraisal fee); General Statutes § 16- *717 266 (reasonable appraisal fees shall be taxed against corporation authorized to take property for purpose of constructing and operating natural gas pipeline when property…”

Laurel, Inc. v. Comm'r of Transp., 428 A.2d 789 (Conn. 1980). · cites it 2× “The Superior Court awarded damages for inverse condemnation under General Statutes §48-17b and ordered the defendants to amend the certificate of taking and assessment of damages and to take all of the plaintiff’s property.”

Sorenson Transp. Co. v. State, 488 A.2d 458 (Conn. App. Ct. 1985). “While General Statutes § 48-17a, which pertains to cases of abandoned or unsuccessful *333 condemnation proceedings, and § 48-17b, which pertains to cases of inverse condemnations, both provide that the owner shall be entitled to “his reasonable costs, disbursements and…”

Laurel, Inc. v. Caldwell, 444 A.2d 1386 (Conn. 1982). · cites it 2× “The Superior Court awarded damages for inverse condemnation under General Statutes § 48-17b and ordered the defendants to amend the certificate of taking and assessment of damages and to take all of the plaintiff’s property.”

Metroplitan Dist. v. Mott (Conn. App. Ct. 2025). · cites it 18× “The trial court properly determined that the defendants were not entitled to attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to statute (§ 48-17b), as the defendants neither alleged an inverse condemnation claim in the counterclaim nor successfully prosecuted such a claim, and, accordingly,…”

Claud-Chambers v. City of West Haven, 427 F. Supp. 2d 76 (D. Conn. 2006). “See Section 48-17b of Connecticut General Statutes (providing for reimbursement of reasonable costs to a plaintiff awarded judgment in an inverse condemnation proceeding against the State).”

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.