Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-146n (2026)

Disclosure of confidential communications between Judicial Department employee and employee assistance program counselor prohibited. Information re participation in employee assistance program

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) For purposes of this section:

(1) “Employee assistance program counselor” means any person engaged in directing or staffing any employee assistance program which may be established by the Supreme Court upon recommendation of the Chief Court Administrator for the employees of the Judicial Department;

(2) “Confidential communications” means all oral and written communications transmitted in confidence between an employee of the Judicial Department and an employee assistance program counselor in the course of their relationship in the employee assistance program and all records prepared by the counselor in the course of that relationship with such employee; and

(3) “Employees of the Judicial Department” means full-time and part-time employees of the Judicial Department including judges of the Supreme Court, Appellate Court and Superior Court but excluding the employees and judges of the probate courts.

(b) No employee assistance program counselor shall disclose any confidential communications to any third person, other than a person to whom disclosure is reasonably necessary for the accomplishment of the purposes for which such counselor is consulted, or in any civil or criminal case or proceeding or in any legislative or administrative proceeding, unless the employee making the confidential communication waives the privilege.

(c) No person in any civil or criminal case or proceeding or in any legislative or administrative proceeding may request or require information from any employee of the Judicial Department relating to an employee's participation in an employee assistance program, including whether or not such employee at any time participated in such employee assistance program.

(P.A. 88-190.)

Cited. 211 C. 555.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2001–2009 · leading case: Dir. of Health Affairs Policy Plan. v. Freedom of Info. Comm'n, 977 A.2d 148 (Conn. 2009).
Dir. of Health Affairs Policy Plan. v. Freedom of Info. Comm'n, 977 A.2d 148 (Conn. 2009). · cites it 4× “ings, in proceedings preliminary to such actions or proceedings, and in legislative and administrative proceedings"); General Statutes § 52-146k(b) (confidential communications between battered women's counselor or sexual assault counselor and victim not disclosable absent…”
Oksana Oleszko v. State Comp. Ins. Fund, David Howard, & Dora Cooke, 243 F.3d 1154 (9th Cir. 2001). “See Conn. Gen.Stat. § 52-146n (West 2000) (recognizing a privilege for communications between state judicial department employees and EAP counselors); Ind.”
— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-146n(b) — 1 case
Dir. of Health Affairs Policy Plan. v. Freedom of Info. Comm'n, 977 A.2d 148 (Conn. 2009). “ings, in proceedings preliminary to such actions or proceedings, and in legislative and administrative proceedings"); General Statutes § 52-146k(b) (confidential communications between battered women's counselor or sexual assault counselor and victim not disclosable absent…”
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.