(a) A decision of the arbitrator shall become a judgment of the court if no appeal from the arbitrator's decision by way of a demand for a trial de novo is filed in accordance with subsection (d) of this section.
(b) A decision of the arbitrator shall become null and void if an appeal from the arbitrator's decision by way of a demand for a trial de novo is filed in accordance with subsection (d) of this section.
(c) For the purpose of this section the word “decision” shall include a decision and judgment rendered pursuant to subsection (a) of section 52-549y, provided the appeal is taken by a party who did not fail to appear at the hearing, and it shall exclude any other decision or judgment rendered pursuant to said section.
(d) An appeal by way of a demand for a trial de novo shall be filed with the court clerk not later than twenty days after the date on which (1) notice of the arbitrator's decision is sent electronically to the parties or their counsel, or (2) the arbitrator's decision is deposited in the United States mail, whichever is later, and shall include a certification that a copy thereof has been served on each party or counsel of record, to be accomplished in accordance with the rules of court. The decision of the arbitrator shall not be admissible in any proceeding resulting after a claim for a trial de novo or from a setting aside of an award in accordance with section 52-549aa.
(e) The Superior Court may refer any proceeding resulting from the filing of a demand for a trial de novo under subsection (d) of this section to a judge trial referee without the consent of the parties, and said judge trial referee shall have and exercise the powers of the Superior Court in respect to trial, judgment and appeal in the case, including a judgment of fifty thousand dollars or more.
(P.A. 82-441, S. 12, 23; P.A. 83-587, S. 65, 96; P.A. 97-24, S. 5, 7; P.A. 01-203, S. 2; P.A. 19-64, S. 23.)
History: P.A. 82-441, S. 12 effective July 1, 1983; P.A. 83-587 deleted references to Subsec. (e) of the section; P.A. 97-24 amended Subsec. (d) by adding provision re inadmissibility of decision of arbitrator, effective January 1, 1998; P.A. 01-203 amended Subsec. (d) by changing “of the filing” of arbitrator's decision to “after the deposit” of arbitrator's decision “in the United States mail, as evidenced by the postmark” and added Subsec. (e) re referral of trial de novo proceedings to judge trial referees without consent of parties and powers of judge trial referees with respect to trial, judgment and appeal, including judgment of $50,000 or more; P.A. 19-64 amended Subsec. (d) by replacing provision re filing with court clerk within 20 days after deposit of arbitrator's decision in mail as evidenced by postmark with provision re filing with court clerk not later than 20 days after date on which notice of arbitrator's decision is sent electronically to parties or counsel or arbitrator's decision is deposited in mail, whichever is later, adding reference to party and making technical changes, effective July 1, 2019.
Right to trial by jury preserved by section. 13 CA 189. Section does not require notice of arbitrator decision be sent both electronically and by mail, it merely recognizes that notice may be sent by two possible methods and then dictates how the twenty day period is to be calculated with respect to each method, the phrase “whichever is late” is applicable only in circumstances in which notice is sent both electronically and by mail. 211 CA 458.
Notes of Decisions
Larmel v. Metro North Commuter R.R. Co., 341 Conn. 332 (Conn. 2021).
· cites it 14× “General Statutes § 52-549z (a). The arbitrator made a finding based on the evidence presented by the parties and clearly articulated the reasons for his findings.”
Allstate Ins. v. Mottolese, 803 A.2d 311 (Conn. 2002).
· cites it 9× “The dispositive issue in this case is whether a party’s proper exercise of its right to a trial de novo in accordance with General Statutes § 52-549z following a nonbinding arbitration proceeding may serve as the grounds for the imposition of sanctions under Practice Book §…”
Nunno v. Wixner, 778 A.2d 145 (Conn. 2001).
· cites it 6× “The arbitrator’s decision and award subsequently became a judgment of the court pursuant to General Statutes § 52-549z 7 and Practice Book § 23-66.”
State v. Miranda, 878 A.2d 1118 (Conn. 2005).
· cites it 2× “For example, with respect to civil cases: civil nonjury cases and demands for trials de novo pursuant to General *742 Statutes § 52-549z may be so referred without the parties’ consent; but civil jury cases in which the pleadings have been closed may only be so referred with the…”
Brown & Brown, Inc. v. Blumenthal, 954 A.2d 816 (Conn. 2008).
· cites it 2× “Criminal cases and civil cases of an adversary nature shall be referred only to state referees who are designated as judge trial referees, and proceedings resulting from a demand for a trial de novo pursuant to subsection (e) of section 52-549z shall be referred only to judge…”
Asselin & Vieceli P'ship, LLC v. Washburn, 194 Conn. App. 519 (Conn. App. Ct. 2019).
· cites it 4× “’’ 3 The defendant incorrectly relied on General Statutes § 52-549z when filing the demand for a trial de novo.”
Pizzoferrato v. Cmty. Renewal Team, Inc., 211 Conn. App. 458 (Conn. App. Ct. 2022).
· cites it 16× “The plaintiff further argues that her interpretation of § 52-549z is ‘‘bolstered by the inclusion [in the statute] of the phrase in accor- dance with the rules of [the] court’’ (emphasis in origi- nal); see General Statutes § 52-549z (d); which she con- tends refers to Practice…”
Wasko v. Farley, 947 A.2d 978 (Conn. App. Ct. 2008).
“Other than civil cases referred to a judge trial referee under § 52-549z, there is no specific language in the statutes as to the power of a judge trial referee to conduct jury selection without the consent of the parties in civil jury cases.”
Krausman v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 195 Conn. App. 682 (Conn. App. Ct. 2020).
· cites it 6× “In the motion, the plaintiff asserted that the defendant had failed to demand a trial de novo pursuant to General Statutes § 52-549z (a).4 On March 12, 2018, the court granted the plaintiff’s motion for judgment.”
Sabatasso v. Hogan, 882 A.2d 719 (Conn. App. Ct. 2005).
· cites it 4× “The case was assigned to nonbinding arbitration, pursuant to General Statutes § 52-549U 1 and Practice Book *811 § 23-61, 2 and the arbitrator awarded the plaintiff $31,000 in damages.”
Ridgaway v. Mount Vernon Fire Ins. Co., 140 A.3d 321 (Conn. App. Ct. 2016).
· cites it 2× “ith the written consent of the parties or their attorneys, any civil jury case, pending before such court, in which the issues have been closed, to a judge trial referee, who shall have and exercise the powers of the superior court in respect to trial, judgment and appeal in…”
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.