Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53-264 (2026)

Maintenance

✓ current as of May 2026

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

Each attorney, state marshal or constable, who, with intent to make gain by the fees of collection, purchases and sues upon any choses in action, shall be fined not more than one hundred dollars.

(1949 Rev., S. 8596; P.A. 00-99, S. 119, 154.)

History: P.A. 00-99 replaced reference to sheriff and deputy sheriff with state marshal, effective December 1, 2000.

State of facts not within section. 14 C. 23. Cited. 77 C. 461. Attorney may purchase judgment and sue thereon. 85 C. 267. Common law as to maintenance never adopted in this state as applied to civil actions. 100 C. 110; 106 C. 70.

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)

(Return to
List of Chapters)

(Return to
List of Titles)

Secs. 53-265 to 53-278. Impersonation of policeman. Corruption of agents and employees. Betrayal of employer's correspondence, books or accounts. Corrupt influences; court proceedings; evidence. Unlawful payment of naturalization fees. Fortune telling and other fraudulent practices. Betting on races and jai alai games. Gaming on public conveyances. Gaming house; keepers; frequenters. Owning faro bank. Witness not excused. Gaming in general. Keeping billiard table or slot machine for gambling purpose. Sections 53-265 to 53-278, inclusive, are repealed.

(1949 Rev., S. 8601–8603, 8605, 8645, 8647–8655; 1955, S. 3305d; 1969, P.A. 828, S. 214; 1971, P.A. 787; 865, S. 20; 1972, P.A. 60, S. 13–16; 187, S. 15; P.A. 73-455, S. 9; P.A. 93-5.)

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)

(Return to
List of Chapters)

(Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 1999–1999 · leading case: State v. Duffey, 981 P.2d 1 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Duffey, 981 P.2d 1 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). “Penal Code § 158 (West 1999); Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 53-264 (West 1994); Ga.”

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.