More Categories

Section 52-265a – Direct appeal on questions involving the public interest

May 11, 2021 | Civil Procedure, Connecticut

(a) Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 52-264 and 52-265, any party to an action who is aggrieved by an order or decision of the Superior Court in an action which involves a matter of substantial public interest and in which delay may work a substantial injustice, may appeal under this section from the order or decision to the Supreme Court within two weeks from the date of the issuance of the order or decision. The appeal shall state the question of law on which it is based.
(b) The Chief Justice shall, within one week of receipt of the appeal, rule whether the issue involves a substantial public interest and whether delay may work a substantial injustice.
(c) Upon certification by the Chief Justice that a substantial public interest is involved and that delay may work a substantial injustice, the trial judge shall immediately transmit a certificate of his decision, together with a proper finding of fact, to the Chief Justice, who shall thereupon call a special session of the Supreme Court for the purpose of an immediate hearing upon the appeal.
(d) The Chief Justice may make orders to expedite such appeals, including orders specifying the manner in which the record on appeal may be prepared.

Conn. Gen. Stat. ยง 52-265a

(1967, P.A. 895; P.A. 76-436, S. 140, 681; P.A. 82-160, S. 138.)

Cited. 192 Conn. 704; 194 C. 677; 195 Conn. 303; Id., 384; 196 Conn. 451; 199 C. 667; 202 C. 252; Id., 405; Id., 660; 204 C. 212; 208 Conn. 156; Id., 329; Id., 515; 212 C. 258; 216 Conn. 253; 217 C. 303; 221 C. 346; 222 C. 331; 225 C. 305; 226 C. 757; 227 C. 545; 233 C. 557; 235 C. 206; Id., 671; 239 Conn. 93; 241 C. 282; 242 C. 409. Discovery order in insurance coverage case is appealable since such order directly involved attorney-client privilege, and could compromise such privilege in claims litigated in other jurisdictions and prejudice plaintiff’s handling of ongoing and future actions due to the knowledge that communications with clients might not be kept confidential. 249 C. 36. Late petition for certification to appeal was proper under section where it was clear that Supreme Court had jurisdiction over certified matter and the facts of the case militated in favor of choosing the most expeditious route to avoid potentially irreparable harm to intervenors. 302 C. 162. A crime victim is not a party to the criminal proceeding in the trial court and is therefore precluded from pursuing an appeal under section. 304 Conn. 330. Cited. 22 Conn.App. 73; 29 Conn.App. 105; Id., 716; 32 Conn.App. 340; 37 CA 269; Id., 694. Cited. 37 Conn.Supp. 541.