(a) If the plaintiff does not, within the time allowed for acceptance of the offer of compromise and before the commencement of the trial, file the plaintiff's notice of acceptance, the offer shall be deemed to be withdrawn and shall not be given in evidence.
(b) Unless the plaintiff recovers more than the sum specified in the offer of compromise, with interest from its date, the plaintiff shall recover no costs accruing after the plaintiff received notice of the filing of such offer, but shall pay the defendant's costs accruing after the plaintiff received notice. Such costs may include reasonable attorney's fees in an amount not to exceed three hundred fifty dollars.
(c) This section shall not be interpreted to abrogate the contractual rights of any party concerning the recovery of attorney's fees in accordance with the provisions of any written contract between the parties to the action. The provisions of this section shall not apply to cases in which nominal damages have been assessed upon a hearing after a default or after a demurrer has been overruled.
(1949 Rev., S. 7944; P.A. 79-250, S. 2; P.A. 82-160, S. 96; P.A. 05-275, S. 7.)
History: P.A. 79-250 specified that costs may include attorney's fees not exceeding $350 and that provisions do not abrogate contractual rights re recovery of attorney's fees; P.A. 82-160 rephrased the section and inserted Subsec. indicators; P.A. 05-275 amended Subsecs. (a) and (b) to replace “offer of judgment” with “offer of compromise” where appearing and make technical changes, effective October 1, 2005, and applicable to actions accruing on or after that date.
Cited. 163 C. 445. The phrase “such costs may include reasonable attorney's fees” modifies only the term “defendant's costs” in the immediately preceding clause of statute. 188 C. 213. Cited. 239 C. 708. Plaintiff must establish all of the elements of a negligence claim, including causation and actual injury, in order to recover and, therefore, the technical legal injury concept does not apply to a negligence action. 277 C. 364.
Cited. 8 CA 254.
Cited. 10 CS 166. Reasonableness of offer of judgment discussed. 39 CS 467.
Subsec. (b):
Subsec. requires payment of costs that are authorized elsewhere in statute if plaintiff fails to recover more than the offer of compromise, and because no statute authorizes costs for expenses of daily expedited trial transcripts, defendants' attorney's attendance at videoconference deposition or defendants' and defendants' employee trial testimony, trial court improperly authorized such costs. 289 C. 61.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
9
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1972–2024 · leading case:
Verrastro v. Sivertsen, 448 A.2d 1344 (Conn. 1982).
Verrastro v. Sivertsen, 448 A.2d 1344 (Conn. 1982).
· cites it 19× “The plaintiff also takes issue with the Superior Court’s interpretation of the language of General Statutes § 52-195. His claim is that the portion of that statute which provides that “[s]uch costs may include reasonable attorney’s fees in an amount not to exceed three hundred…”
Smith v. Andrews, 959 A.2d 597 (Conn. 2008).
· cites it 9× “. .” “When constru *82 ing a statute, [o]ur fundamental objective is to ascertain and give effect to the apparent intent of the legislature.”
Right v. Breen, 890 A.2d 1287 (Conn. 2006).
· cites it 9× “The plaintiff responds that there is no need to revisit Keller because General Statutes § 52-195 (b) 6 affords protection against an award of costs for claims involving technical legal injury.”
Blakeslee Arpaia Chapman, Inc. v. EI Constructors, Inc., 687 A.2d 506 (Conn. 1997).
· cites it 4× “General Statutes § 52-195 (b). 47 Although we recognize that the defendant’s sword may not have the same cutting edge that offer of judgment interest has, 48 it is the defendant who holds *749 the key to the settlement process when a reasonable offer is made by the plaintiff.”
Traystman, Coric & Keramidas v. Daigle, 922 A.2d 1056 (Conn. 2007).
· cites it 2× “Nevertheless, it is implicit in our statutes governing recoverable costs, and our rules of practice expressly contemplate, that the costs requested in a bill of costs generally are intended to be of a type that the court clerk may grant automatically.”
Krawiec v. Kraft, 311 A.2d 82 (Conn. 1972).
· cites it 4× “General Statutes § 52-195 makes provision for the allocation of costs in the event the offer is not accepted.”
Paull v. Coughlin, 466 A.2d 347 (Conn. Super. Ct. 1983).
· cites it 2× “General Statutes § 52-195 provides that when a plaintiff refuses an offer of judgment by the defendant and subsequently does not recover more than the amount offered, he shall pay the defendant’s costs which may include reasonable attorney’s fees in an amount not to exceed $350.”
Martin v. Todd Arthurs Co., 225 Conn. App. 844 (Conn. App. Ct. 2024).
· cites it 3× “General Statutes § 52-194. If a plaintiff fails to file the written acceptance prior to the sixty day deadline, then ‘‘the offer shall be deemed to be withdrawn and shall not be given in evidence.”
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.