Conn. Gen. Stat. » Title 52 — CIVIL ACTIONS · Chapter 906 — Postjudgment Procedures
Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-400e (2025)

Failure to pay judgment as basis for revocation, suspension or refusal to grant or renew license of licensed business

✓ laws through the 2024 session: the source has not yet published 2025 Public Acts (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Whenever a judgment in a civil action which relates to activities for which a license is required has been rendered against a business which is licensed by a state or local licensing authority and which remains unpaid for one hundred eighty days after receipt by the judgment debtor of notice of its entry and the judgment has not been stayed or appealed, the state or local licensing authority shall consider such failure to pay, if deliberate or part of a pattern of similar conduct indicating recklessness, as a basis for the revocation, suspension or conditioning of, or refusal to grant or renew such license. Nothing herein shall be construed to preempt an authority's existing policy if it is more restrictive.

(P.A. 83-349; P.A. 84-546, S. 123, 173.)

History: P.A. 84-546 made technical change.

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)		 (Return to
List of Chapters)		 (Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2002–2004 · leading case: Ames v. Comm'r, 839 A.2d 1250 (Conn. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Ames v. Comm'r, 839 A.2d 1250 (Conn. 2004). · cites it 4× “Pursuant to § 14-52, however, the dealer had obtained a surety bond for $20,000, which was issued by Western Surety [Company (Western Surety)] , 4 After the expiration of the 180 day waiting period of General Statutes § 52-400e, 5 [the defendant, the commissioner of motor…”
Ames v. Comm'r of Motor Vehs., 802 A.2d 126 (Conn. App. Ct. 2002). · cites it 4× “After the expiration of the 180 day waiting period of General Statutes § 52-400e, 4 the commissioner invoked the surety bond *793 on the plaintiffs behalf.”
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.