Conn. Gen. Stat. » Title 52 — CIVIL ACTIONS · Chapter 903a — Prejudgment Remedies
Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-278n (2026)

Motion to disclose property. Order for disclosure. Substitution of surety

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) The court may, on motion of a party, order an appearing defendant to disclose property in which he has an interest or debts owing to him sufficient to satisfy a prejudgment remedy. The existence, location and extent of the defendant's interest in such property or debts shall be subject to disclosure. The form and terms of disclosure shall be determined by the court.

(b) A motion to disclose pursuant to this section may be made by attaching it to the application for a prejudgment remedy or may be made at any time after the filing of the application.

(c) The court may order disclosure at any time prior to final judgment after it has determined that the party filing the motion for disclosure has, pursuant to section 52-278d, 52-278e or 52-278i, probable cause sufficient for the granting of a prejudgment remedy.

(d) A defendant, in lieu of disclosing assets pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, may move the court for substitution either of a bond with surety substantially in compliance with sections 52-307 and 52-308, or of other sufficient security.

(e) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (a) to (d), inclusive, of this section, no party may compel disclosure of the names and addresses of clients of an individual or entity that provides professional services, as defined in subdivision (20) of section 4e-1, when the disclosure of such names and addresses would constitute a violation of state or federal law, or the applicable rules of professional conduct governing such profession, as the case may be.

(f) Rules of court shall be enacted to carry out the foregoing provisions and may provide for reasonable sanctions to enforce orders issued pursuant to this section.

(P.A. 81-410, S. 1; P.A. 86-403, S. 86, 132; P.A. 93-431, S. 6, 10; P.A. 24-108, S. 35.)

History: P.A. 86-403 made technical change in Subsec. (c); P.A. 93-431 amended Subsec. (c) to replace “issuance of a prejudgment remedy” with “granting of a prejudgment remedy”, effective January 1, 1994; P.A. 24-108 added new Subsec. (e) re party not being able to compel disclosure of names and addresses of clients of an individual or entity that provides professional services when disclosure would violate state or federal law or applicable rules of professional conduct, and redesignated existing Subsec. (e) as Subsec. (f).

Cited. 188 C. 69; 226 C. 773.

Cited. 19 CA 256; 29 CA 48.

Cited. 38 CS 98.

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)		 (Return to
List of Chapters)		 (Return to
List of Titles)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1992–2025 · leading case: Connecticut Nat'l Bank v. Investors Capital Corp., 613 A.2d 1370 (Conn. App. Ct. 1992).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Connecticut Nat'l Bank v. Investors Capital Corp., 613 A.2d 1370 (Conn. App. Ct. 1992). · cites it 10× “The defendants, who had received notice of both the collection action and the prejudgment remedy as well as notice of their statu *51 tory rights pursuant to General Statutes § 52-278e (b), 2 did not move to dissolve, vacate or modify the prejudgment remedy.”
Roberts v. Triplanet Partners, LLC, 950 F. Supp. 2d 418 (D. Conn. 2013). · cites it 5× “# 15), so that he may seek an order of attachment under Conn. Gen.Stat. § 52-278n. Section 52-278n(a) provides that “[t]he court may, on motion of a party, order an appearing defendant to disclose property in which he has an interest or debts owing to him sufficient to satisfy a…”
Insurity, Inc. v. Mut. Grp., Ltd., 260 F. Supp. 2d 486 (D. Conn. 2003). · cites it 9× “Thus, it is a stretch to argue that the strictures of Conn. Gen Stat. § 52-278n (a) and (c), limit what a court can do under Conn.”
Bahrain Telecomm. Co. v. Discoverytel, Inc., 476 F. Supp. 2d 176 (D. Conn. 2007). · cites it 3× “See Conn. Gen.Stat. § 52-278n(c). However, Batelco argues that it need not await the probable cause hearing to determine whether Defendants have any assets to attach.”
Edmands v. Cuno, Inc., 892 A.2d 938 (Conn. 2006). · cites it 2× “B Finally, we turn to the plaintiffs’ claim that the trial court improperly ordered the plaintiffs to disclose assets in order to secure the judgment, pursuant to General Statutes § 52-278n (a), based on the court’s determination as to the value of certain CUNO products in the…”
Metal Mgmt., Inc. v. Schiavone, 514 F. Supp. 2d 227 (D. Conn. 2007). · cites it 6× “See Conn. Gen.Stat. § 52-278n(c). C. Transfer of Assets Into Connecticut As a final matter, Schiavone moves to dismiss the plaintiffs’ application that assets sufficient to satisfy the prejudgment remedy be brought within the state and filed with the clerk of this court for…”
Connecticut Light & Power Co. v. Gilmore, 875 A.2d 546 (Conn. App. Ct. 2005). · cites it 2× “3 In connection with the prejudgment remedy application and pursuant to General Statutes § 52-278n, the plaintiff filed motions seeking disclosure of each defendant’s assets.”
Electro-Methods, Inc. v. Adolf Meller Co., 473 F. Supp. 2d 281 (D. Conn. 2007). · cites it 2× “PREJUDGMENT DISCLOSURE OF ASSETS Conn. Gen.Stat. § 52-278n(c) provides that a “court may order disclosure at any *307 time prior to final judgment after it has determined that the party filing the motion for disclosure has .”
Floodbreak, LLC v. Art Metal Indus., LLC (D. Conn. 2021). · cites it 5× “Motion for Disclosure of Assets Pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat § 52-278n, FloodBreak additionally moves for an order requiring Defendants to disclose “the nature, existence, holders, and location of any and all property in which it/he has interests” that is available for attachment…”
Zhen Zhu v. Matsu Corp. (D. Conn. 2022). · cites it 5× “Regarding Plaintiffs’ request for an order requiring Defendants to disclose assets to satisfy the prejudgment remedy, Connecticut General Statute § 52-278n(a) states that a “court may, on motion of a party, order an appearing defendant to disclose property in which he has an…”
Maefair Health Care Ctr., Inc. v. Noka, 236 Conn. App. 1 (Conn. App. Ct. 2025). · cites it 4× “6 In connection with the prejudgment remedy application and pursuant to General Statutes § 52-278n, the plaintiff filed a motion seeking the disclo- sure of the decedent’s assets.”
Sentementes v. Lamont (D. Conn. 2021). · cites it 2× “Connecticut General Statutes § 52-278n(c) provides that a disclosure of property can be ordered only after the court “has determined that the party filing the motion for disclosure has, pursuant to section 523- 278d, 52-278e, or 52-278i, probable cause sufficient for the…”
Show all 15 citing cases →
— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-278n(a) — 3 cases
Roberts v. Triplanet Partners, LLC, 950 F. Supp. 2d 418 (D. Conn. 2013). “# 15), so that he may seek an order of attachment under Conn. Gen.Stat. § 52-278n. Section 52-278n(a) provides that “[t]he court may, on motion of a party, order an appearing defendant to disclose property in which he has an interest or debts owing to him sufficient to satisfy a…”
Floodbreak, LLC v. Art Metal Indus., LLC (D. Conn. 2021). “Motion for Disclosure of Assets Pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat § 52-278n, FloodBreak additionally moves for an order requiring Defendants to disclose “the nature, existence, holders, and location of any and all property in which it/he has interests” that is available for attachment…”
Zhen Zhu v. Matsu Corp. (D. Conn. 2022). “Regarding Plaintiffs’ request for an order requiring Defendants to disclose assets to satisfy the prejudgment remedy, Connecticut General Statute § 52-278n(a) states that a “court may, on motion of a party, order an appearing defendant to disclose property in which he has an…”
— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-278n(c) — 9 cases
Bahrain Telecomm. Co. v. Discoverytel, Inc., 476 F. Supp. 2d 176 (D. Conn. 2007). “See Conn. Gen.Stat. § 52-278n(c). However, Batelco argues that it need not await the probable cause hearing to determine whether Defendants have any assets to attach.”
Metal Mgmt., Inc. v. Schiavone, 514 F. Supp. 2d 227 (D. Conn. 2007). “See Conn. Gen.Stat. § 52-278n(c). C. Transfer of Assets Into Connecticut As a final matter, Schiavone moves to dismiss the plaintiffs’ application that assets sufficient to satisfy the prejudgment remedy be brought within the state and filed with the clerk of this court for…”
Insurity, Inc. v. Mut. Grp., Ltd., 260 F. Supp. 2d 486 (D. Conn. 2003). “Thus, it is a stretch to argue that the strictures of Conn. Gen Stat. § 52-278n (a) and (c), limit what a court can do under Conn.”
Electro-Methods, Inc. v. Adolf Meller Co., 473 F. Supp. 2d 281 (D. Conn. 2007). “PREJUDGMENT DISCLOSURE OF ASSETS Conn. Gen.Stat. § 52-278n(c) provides that a “court may order disclosure at any *307 time prior to final judgment after it has determined that the party filing the motion for disclosure has .”
Zhen Zhu v. Matsu Corp. (D. Conn. 2022). “Regarding Plaintiffs’ request for an order requiring Defendants to disclose assets to satisfy the prejudgment remedy, Connecticut General Statute § 52-278n(a) states that a “court may, on motion of a party, order an appearing defendant to disclose property in which he has an…”
— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-278n(e) — 4 cases
Roberts v. Triplanet Partners, LLC, 950 F. Supp. 2d 418 (D. Conn. 2013). “# 15), so that he may seek an order of attachment under Conn. Gen.Stat. § 52-278n. Section 52-278n(a) provides that “[t]he court may, on motion of a party, order an appearing defendant to disclose property in which he has an interest or debts owing to him sufficient to satisfy a…”
Bahrain Telecomm. Co. v. Discoverytel, Inc., 476 F. Supp. 2d 176 (D. Conn. 2007). “See Conn. Gen.Stat. § 52-278n(c). However, Batelco argues that it need not await the probable cause hearing to determine whether Defendants have any assets to attach.”
Insurity, Inc. v. Mut. Grp., Ltd., 260 F. Supp. 2d 486 (D. Conn. 2003). “Thus, it is a stretch to argue that the strictures of Conn. Gen Stat. § 52-278n (a) and (c), limit what a court can do under Conn.”
Amatulli v. People's Bank, 965 F. Supp. 1 (D. Conn. 1997).
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.