(a) No execution to enforce a judgment for money damages rendered in any court of this state may be issued after the expiration of twenty years from the date the judgment was entered and no action based upon such a judgment may be instituted after the expiration of twenty-five years from the date the judgment was entered, except that there shall be no time limitation on the issuance of such execution or the institution of such action if the judgment was rendered in an action to recover damages for personal injury caused by sexual assault where the party legally at fault for such injury was convicted of a violation of section
53a-70 or
53a-70a.
(b) No execution to enforce a judgment for money damages rendered in a small claims session may be issued after the expiration of ten years from the date the judgment was entered, and no action based upon any such judgment may be instituted after the expiration of fifteen years from the date the judgment was entered.
(c) With respect to a judgment for money damages rendered in any court of this state, including, but not limited to, a small claims session, a motion to revive such judgment may be filed with the Superior Court prior to the expiration of any applicable period of time to enforce such judgment as set forth in this section. The court may grant the motion to revive the judgment if the court finds that the applicable time period to enforce the judgment under this section has not expired. No order to revive a judgment may extend the time period to enforce a judgment beyond the applicable time period set forth in this section.
(1953, S. 3234d; P.A. 76-59, S. 2; P.A. 77-452, S. 32, 72; P.A. 82-160, S. 255; P.A. 84-317, S. 1, 3; P.A. 02-138, S. 22; P.A. 09-215, S. 1.)
History: P.A. 76-59 essentially replaced previous provisions which simply stated “No action based upon a judgment for money damages which has been rendered in any court of this state shall be instituted after the expiration of 21 years from the date of such judgment, provided no payments have been made on the same during such period”; P.A. 77-452 removed reference to “court of common pleas” small claims sessions in exception, effective July 1, 1978; P.A. 82-160 rephrased the section and inserted Subsec. indicators; P.A. 84-317 increased the time limitation on executions to enforce judgment for money damages rendered in small claims court from 5 to 10 years from date judgment was entered and institution of action based on any such judgment from 10 to 15 years from date judgment was entered; P.A. 02-138 amended Subsec. (a) to add exception eliminating time limitation if judgment was rendered in action for damages caused by sexual assault where party legally at fault was convicted of violating Sec. 53a-70 or 53a-70a; P.A. 09-215 added Subsec. (c) re motion to revive judgment.
Cited. 15 CA 752; 38 CA 44; 45 CA 543. Subsec. (c) is a procedural statute that confers continuing jurisdiction on the court, and may properly be applied retroactively. 132 CA 192; judgment affirmed, see 309 C. 840.
Notes of Decisions
Inv. Assocs. v. Summit Assocs., Inc., 31 A.3d 820 (Conn. App. Ct. 2011).
· cites it 20× “Lancia appeals from the order of the trial court granting the motion to revive a judgment filed by the plaintiff, Investment Associates, pursuant to General Statutes § 52-598 (c). 1 On appeal, the defendant argues that the trial court *195 (1) lacked subject matter jurisdiction…”
Cadle Co. v. Ogalin, 167 A.3d 402 (Conn. App. Ct. 2017).
· cites it 6× “The court first concluded that General Statutes § 52-598 authorized the present action on the 1994 judgment and that the plaintiff had commenced it timely.”
Pacelli Bros. Transp. v. Pacelli, 456 A.2d 325 (Conn. 1983).
· cites it 2× “It appears from the allegation that judgment had entered that the defendant might, in any event, have claimed that General Statutes § 52-598 (twenty-five years) would have been applicable.”
Bower v. D'Onfro, 696 A.2d 1285 (Conn. App. Ct. 1997).
· cites it 2× “The reasoning in that case was based on the applicable statute of limitations, General Statutes § 52-598, which provides that execution may issue upon judgment for money damages for up to twenty years from the date of judgment.”
Quickpower Int'l Corp. v. City of Danbury, 796 A.2d 622 (Conn. App. Ct. 2002).
· cites it 3× “In its brief to this court, the plaintiff presented a new argument in which it asserted that in granting summary judgment, the trial court applied the three year and six year statutes of limitation in General Statutes §§ 52-581 and 52-576, respectively, which are, in fact,…”
Premier Capital, LLC v. Shaw, 206 A.3d 237 (Conn. App. Ct. 2019).
· cites it 2× “See General Statutes § 52-598 (a) ("[n]o execution to enforce a judgment for money damages rendered in any court of this state may be issued after the expiration of twenty years from the date the judgment was entered and no action based upon such a judgment may be instituted…”
Nemeth v. Gun Rack, Ltd., 659 A.2d 722 (Conn. App. Ct. 1995).
· cites it 2× “Indeed, the limitations for the commencement of actions are usually entirely separate from the limitations on execution of judgments.”
Stafford Higgins Indus., Inc. v. City of Norwalk, 546 A.2d 340 (Conn. App. Ct. 1988).
· cites it 4× “General Statutes § 52-598 3 provides that an execution may issue upon a judgment for money damages for up to twenty years from the date the judgment entered.”
Gaddy v. Mount Vernon Fire Ins. Co., 192 Conn. App. 337 (Conn. App. Ct. 2019).
· cites it 2× “Because the plaintiff has never obtained a judgment against these defendants, they, as a matter of law, are not judgment debtors in this case.”
Tracey v. Miami Beach Assn., 288 A.3d 629 (Conn. App. Ct. 2022).
· cites it 3× “Although the General Assembly has imposed a twenty-five year statute of limitations on an action to enforce a judgment for money damages; see General Statutes § 52-598; no statutory limitation period exists for an action to enforce a judgment that is injunctive in nature.”
Gaddy v. Mount Vernon Fire Ins. Co., No. AC41130 Appendix (Conn. App. Ct. Sept. 3, 2019).
· cites it 5× “’’ 8 General Statutes § 52-598 (a) provides in relevant part: ‘‘[N]o action based upon such a judgment may be instituted after the expiration of twenty-five years from the date the judgment was entered .”
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-598(a): 1 case
Cadle Co. v. Ogalin, 167 A.3d 402 (Conn. App. Ct. 2017).
“The court first concluded that General Statutes § 52-598 authorized the present action on the 1994 judgment and that the plaintiff had commenced it timely.”
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-598(c): 1 case
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.