Conn. Gen. Stat. » Title 07 — MUNICIPALITIES · Chapter 97 — Municipalities: General Provisions
Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 7-101 (2026)

Town seal

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Each town shall provide itself with a seal with the name of the town and the state and the word “seal” inscribed thereon and may place thereon any such other suitable inscription or design as it determines. If any town changes any design or inscription upon its seal, a certificate describing such change shall be made and filed by the town clerk of such town with the Secretary of the State. The town clerk shall have the custody of such seal.

(1949 Rev., S. 622.)

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)		 (Return to
List of Chapters)		 (Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1974–2024 · leading case: Hughes v. City of Hartford, 96 F. Supp. 2d 114 (D. Conn. 2000).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Hughes v. City of Hartford, 96 F. Supp. 2d 114 (D. Conn. 2000). · cites it 2× “In his complaint plaintiff also cites Conn. Gen.Stat. § 7-101, which requires towns in Connecticut to adopt a town seal.”
LaPointe v. Windsor Locks Bd. of Educ., 162 F. Supp. 2d 10 (D. Conn. 2001). · cites it 2× “2d 1023, 1025-26 (1985) (finding that the notice and time limitation provisions of Conn. Gen. Stat. § 7-101 (a), one of the statutes cited by the plaintiffs in their notice of intent to sue, 'have no application to the plaintiff's 42 U.”
Windham Cmty. Mem'l Hosp. v. City of Willimantic, 348 A.2d 651 (Conn. 1974). “…where a distinction is clearly made as to other municipal subdivisions. In chapter 97, under “General Provisions,” § 7-101 refers to “town”; § 7-101a refers to “town, city, borough, consolidated town and city and consolidated town and borough”; § 7-103 refers to a “town,…”
Manganella v. Keyes, 613 F. Supp. 795 (D. Conn. 1985). “§ 7-101a, the municipality is not necessarily admitting that the employee was acting pursuant to an official policy or custom so as to make the municipality liable under Monell .”
Chabad Lubavitch of Litchfield Cnty., Inc. v. Borough of Litchfield, 213 F. Supp. 3d 329 (D. Conn. 2016). · cites it 2× “Additionally, even if the individual defendants are found liable on the Chabad’s substantial burden claim, they will not be required to pay the judgment against them, nor will they be required to reimburse the Borough of Litchfield for their legal expenses.”
Lawrence v. Westport (D. Conn. 2024). · cites it 2× “Connecticut General Statutes § 7-101(a)(d) “[d]oes not provide plaintiffs with a direct right of action against a municipality.”
— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 7-101(a)(d) — 1 case
Lawrence v. Westport (D. Conn. 2024). “Connecticut General Statutes § 7-101(a)(d) “[d]oes not provide plaintiffs with a direct right of action against a municipality.”
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.