Go Syfert

Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-552k (2026)

Supplementary provisions

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Unless displaced by the provisions of sections 52-552a to 52-552l, inclusive, the principles of law and equity, including the law merchant and the law relating to principal and agent, estoppel, laches, fraud, misrepresentation, duress, coercion, mistake, insolvency or other validating or invalidating cause, supplement the provisions of said sections.

(P.A. 91-297, S. 11.)

Applying the law of agency does not displace and is not inconsistent with the provisions or policies of Secs. 52-552a to 52-552l and not applying the laws of agency would undermine the purposes of said Secs. without providing any commensurate benefit; law of agency applies to defendant's transfers of debtor's assets pursuant to a power of attorney for purposes of plaintiff's fraudulent transfer claim. 332 C. 1.

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)

(Return to
List of Chapters)

(Return to
List of Titles)

Sec. 52-552l. Uniformity of application and construction. Sections 52-552a to 52-552k, inclusive, shall be applied and construed to effectuate their general purpose to make uniform the law with respect to the subject of said sections among states enacting them.

(P.A. 91-297, S. 12.)

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)

(Return to
List of Chapters)

(Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 2007–2019 · leading case: Geriatrics, Inc. v. McGee, 208 A.3d 1197 (Conn. 2019).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Geriatrics, Inc. v. McGee, 208 A.3d 1197 (Conn. 2019). · cites it 14× “General Statutes § 52-552k. The defendant Stephen McGee used a power of attorney granted to him by his elderly mother, the named defendant, Helen McGee (Helen), to transfer to himself funds from Helen's checking account, claiming that Helen had authorized him to reimburse…”

Stuart v. Stuart, 996 A.2d 259 (Conn. 2010). · cites it 3× “) General Statutes § 52-552k. In the present case, § 52-564 does not contain any language similar to that used by the legislature in § 52-552k, which supplements the act with principles of law and equity relating to fraud.”

Stuart v. Stuart, 962 A.2d 842 (Conn. App. Ct. 2009). · cites it 2× “” “In common-law fraud cases, the plaintiff has the burden of proving fraud by clear and convincing evidence.”

Wieselman v. Hoeniger, 930 A.2d 768 (Conn. App. Ct. 2007). · cites it 2× “supplement the provisions of said section.” The plaintiff claims that although the court applied the clear and convincing standard of proof required to *597 establish a fraudulent transfer, it did so to the wrong party, and, thus, the judgment should be reversed.”

Geriatrics, Inc. v. McGee (Conn. 2019). · cites it 6× “General Statutes § 52-552k. The defendant Stephen McGee used a power of attor- ney granted to him by his elderly mother, the named defendant, Helen McGee (Helen), to transfer to himself funds from Helen’s checking account, claiming that Helen had authorized him to reimburse…”

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.