Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53-301 (2026)

Dealing in automobiles on Sunday

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Section 53-301 is repealed, effective October 1, 2002.

(1949 Rev., S. 8607; 1951, 1953, 1955, S. 3302d; 1957, P.A. 614, S. 1; P.A. 02-89, S. 90.)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1964–1998 · leading case: Fair Cadillac-Oldsmobile Isuzu P'ship v. Bailey, 640 A.2d 101 (Conn. 1994).
Fair Cadillac-Oldsmobile Isuzu P'ship v. Bailey, 640 A.2d 101 (Conn. 1994). · cites it 35× “The sole issue in this case is whether General Statutes § 53-301, 1 which prohibits a party engaged in the business of selling motor vehicles from selling them on Sunday, violates the state constitution.”
Binette v. Sabo, 710 A.2d 688 (Conn. 1998). · cites it 2× “2d 101 (1994) (court declined to reach alternative state constitutional grounds for ruling statute unconstitutional where General Statutes § 53-301 found to violate substantive due process under article first, § 8, of Connecticut constitution); State v.”
Caldor's, Inc. v. Bedding Barn, Inc., 417 A.2d 343 (Conn. 1979). “Related sections which had survived until 1978 included: § 53-300a, validating Sunday real estate contracts; § 53-301, forbidding Sunday dealing in automobiles; § 53-303, allowing a Sabbatarian exemption from Sunday closing for those conscientiously observing Saturday as a…”
State v. Picheco, 203 A.2d 242 (Conn. App. Ct. 1964). · cites it 2× “The fact that § 53-301, under the language “[n]o person, firm or corporation,” prohibits anyone engaged in the automobile business from keeping open a place of business on Sunday does not, contrary to the defendant’s contention, evidence a legislative intent that §53-300 should…”
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.