Connecticut
Connecticut Punitive Damages Laws: Limits, Proof and Statutes (2026)
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited October 19, 2026). · 21 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content
Connecticut allows punitive damages at common law, but the Connecticut Supreme Court limits a common-law award to the plaintiff's litigation expenses less taxable costs (Waterbury Petroleum Products, Inc. v. Canaan Oil & Fuel Co., 193 Conn. 208 (1984); Berry v. Loiseau, 223 Conn. 786 (1992)). Larger awards come from statutes: Conn. Gen. Stat. 52-240b lets the court award punitive damages against a product seller up to twice the damages awarded to the plaintiff, and 14-295 lets the trier of fact award double or treble damages for a deliberate or reckless violation of listed motor vehicle statutes.
The conduct standard is judge-made, no statute sets a general cap or burden of proof, and a range of statutes for particular claims authorize or limit punitive damages on their own terms. For how other states compare, see punitive damages laws by state.
Information last verified on 2026-10-19. This article has not been reviewed by a licensed lawyer.
Jurisdiction scope: This article covers Connecticut state law on punitive damages in civil cases: the common-law rule stated by the Connecticut Supreme Court, Conn. Gen. Stat. 52-240b and 14-295, and the other statutes and decisions named below. It does not cover compensatory damages, wrongful-death procedure, deadlines and beneficiaries (see Connecticut wrongful death law), federal claims, or every statute that authorizes punitive or multiplied damages for a particular claim beyond those named here.
Does Connecticut allow punitive damages?
Yes, in a limited form. Connecticut courts allow punitive (also called exemplary) damages at common law, and then limit the amount to what it cost the plaintiff to bring the case. In Waterbury Petroleum (1984), the Connecticut Supreme Court explained that the rule "provides for the payment of a victim's costs of litigation, which would be otherwise unavailable to him, while establishing a clear reference to guide the jury fairly in arriving at the amount of the award."
The awards that can exceed litigation costs are statutory. Section 52-240b covers punitive damages against product sellers, 14-295 covers double or treble damages in motor vehicle cases, and other statutes authorize punitive damages for specific claims. Connecticut has no general punitive damages statute that sets a conduct standard or burden of proof for ordinary tort cases.
What must be proven for common-law punitive damages
The conduct standard. In Berry v. Loiseau (1992), quoting its earlier decision in Venturi v. Savitt, Inc. (1983), the Connecticut Supreme Court stated:
"In order to award punitive or exemplary damages, evidence must reveal a reckless indifference to the rights of others or an intentional and wanton violation of those rights."
Pleading. The claim has to be pleaded clearly. In Markey v. Santangelo, 195 Conn. 76 (1985), the court stated: "To furnish a basis for recovery of such damages, the pleadings must allege and the evidence must show wanton or wilful malicious misconduct, and the language contained in the pleadings must be sufficiently explicit to inform the court and opposing counsel that such damages are being sought."
Contract claims. In McCarter & English, LLP v. Jarrow Formulas, Inc., 351 Conn. 186 (2025), the Connecticut Supreme Court concluded "that a law firm may not recover common-law punitive damages for its client's breach of contract unless it pleads and proves the existence of an independent tort for which punitive damages are recoverable."
Burden of proof. No Connecticut statute sets the burden of proof for punitive damages. In Freeman v. Alamo Management Co., 221 Conn. 674 (1992), the Connecticut Supreme Court held that the preponderance of the evidence standard governs a claim for statutory double damages under 47a-46, and said that no higher standard of proof is required "in a common law claim for punitive damages, in which a plaintiff must allege and prove that a defendant's misconduct was wanton or wilfully malicious." The court noted that in product liability reform the General Assembly "expressly rejected a proposal to adopt the clear and convincing evidence standard for awarding punitive damages," and "elected instead to cap the amount of punitive damages and to have that amount be determined by the judge." Section 52-240b itself says only that the claimant must "prove" the product seller's reckless disregard.
How much: the litigation-expense rule
A common-law punitive award in Connecticut is measured by the plaintiff's litigation expenses, less taxable costs. In Berry v. Loiseau, the plaintiff asked the court to abandon that rule. The court declined:
"We decline the plaintiff's invitation to abandon our well established rule governing punitive damages awards. ... We affirmed the continuing viability of a long line of cases holding that common law punitive damages serve primarily to compensate the plaintiff for his injuries and, thus, are properly limited to the plaintiff's litigation expenses less taxable costs."
In Bifolck v. Philip Morris, Inc., 324 Conn. 402 (2016), the Connecticut Supreme Court observed that "the trier of fact traditionally had determined the amount of common-law punitive damages."
Product cases: Conn. Gen. Stat. 52-240b
Section 52-240b provides:
"Punitive damages may be awarded if the claimant proves that the harm suffered was the result of the product seller's reckless disregard for the safety of product users, consumers or others who were injured by the product. If the trier of fact determines that punitive damages should be awarded, the court shall determine the amount of such damages not to exceed an amount equal to twice the damages awarded to the plaintiff."
Two features set this statute apart from the common-law rule. First, the limit is twice the damages awarded to the plaintiff, not litigation expenses. In Bifolck, answering certified questions from the federal district court in Connecticut, the Connecticut Supreme Court considered "whether punitive damages under the act are limited to litigation expenses less costs" and concluded "that they are not." Second, the trier of fact decides whether to award punitive damages, but the judge sets the amount: "the statute vests the court with exclusive authority to determine the amount of damages."
Motor vehicle cases: double or treble damages under 14-295
In vehicle cases, the statute that multiplies damages is Conn. Gen. Stat. 14-295, which provides:
"In any civil action to recover damages resulting from personal injury, wrongful death or damage to property, the trier of fact may award double or treble damages if the injured party has specifically pleaded that another party has deliberately or with reckless disregard operated a motor vehicle in violation of section 14-218a, 14-219, 14-222, 14-227a or 14-227m, subdivision (1) or (2) of subsection (a) of section 14-227n or section 14-230, 14-234, 14-237, 14-239, 14-240a or 14-296aa, and that such violation was a substantial factor in causing such injury, death or damage to property. The owner of a rental or leased motor vehicle shall not be responsible for such damages unless the damages arose from such owner's operation of the motor vehicle."
Each part of that sentence is a condition. The violation must be of one of the listed sections, it must be deliberate or with reckless disregard, it must be specifically pleaded, and it must be a substantial factor in causing the harm. The statute applies in wrongful death actions as well as injury and property cases. The section was last amended by Public Act 19-160. For fault, insurance and deadlines in a crash claim, see Connecticut car accident law.
Is there a cap on punitive damages in Connecticut?
Connecticut has no general statutory cap on punitive damages. At common law, the litigation-expense rule limits the amount. Statutes for particular claims set their own limits, each in its own measure:
| Statute | What it limits | Limit in the statute's words |
|---|---|---|
| 52-240b | Punitive damages against a product seller | "not to exceed an amount equal to twice the damages awarded to the plaintiff," set by the court |
| 35-53(b) | Punitive damages under the Uniform Trade Secrets Act where the court finds wilful and malicious misappropriation | "not exceeding twice any award made under subsection (a)" |
| 14-295 | Multiplied damages for listed motor vehicle violations | "double or treble damages" |
| 46a-89(b)(2)(C) | An award of punitive damages payable to the complainant in a commission petition over discriminatory housing or public accommodations practices, including a civil action elected under 46a-83(g)(2) after a reasonable-cause finding on a 46a-64c housing complaint | "not to exceed fifty thousand dollars" |
| 46a-98(c), (d) | Punitive damages against a creditor that fails to comply with 46a-66, 46a-81f or regulations under 46a-67 | $1,000 to an aggrieved person, as determined by the court; in a class action, the lesser of $5,000 or 1% of the creditor's net worth |
| 22-351a(c), (d) | Punitive damages for intentionally killing or injuring a companion animal (a domesticated dog or cat) | the small claims limit in 51-15(d)(1), which covers actions "not in excess of five thousand dollars"; not available against a licensed veterinarian following accepted standards of practice, the state or a political subdivision or its employees acting within their duties, or animal-protection nonprofit employees or volunteers acting within their duties (22-351a(d)) |
| 52-564a(a) | Punitive damages for shoplifting (taking goods from a store or agricultural produce from real property without paying, or altering price tags) | "an amount not to exceed ... one thousand dollars" since October 1, 2026 (raised from $300 by Public Act 26-130) |
Other statutes that authorize punitive damages, such as 42-110g(a) and 46a-104, name no dollar limit.
Does Connecticut take a share of the award?
No general Connecticut statute diverts part of a private punitive award to the state or a fund. The statutes named on this page that authorize punitive damages do not allocate any part of the award to the state, and 46a-89(b)(2)(C) expressly makes its award "payable to the complainant."
Punitive damages in Connecticut wrongful death cases
Connecticut's wrongful death statute, 52-555(a), lets the executor or administrator recover from the party legally at fault "just damages together with the cost of reasonably necessary medical, hospital and nursing services, and including funeral expenses." The survival statute, 52-599(a), provides that a cause of action "shall survive in favor of or against the executor or administrator of the deceased person." Neither section mentions punitive damages.
Two statutes expressly reach death cases. Section 14-295 allows double or treble damages in "any civil action to recover damages resulting from personal injury, wrongful death or damage to property" on the conditions described above. Section 17b-462(a) allows its action for actual and punitive damages to be brought "by the personal representative of the estate of a deceased elderly victim." Deadlines, who brings the claim and the rest of a death case are on the Connecticut wrongful death page.
Other Connecticut statutes that authorize punitive damages
Unfair trade practices (CUTPA) under 42-110g. Under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, a person who suffers "any ascertainable loss of money or property" from a practice prohibited by 42-110b may sue for actual damages, and "the court may, in its discretion, award punitive damages" (42-110g(a)). The statute states no dollar limit, and the right to a jury trial does not extend to the punitive damages award (42-110g(g)). In White v. FCW Law Offices, 352 Conn. 718 (2025), the Connecticut Supreme Court held that an identity theft plaintiff was "entitled to an award of punitive damages under CUTPA in addition to an award of treble damages under § 52-571h (b)," because, unlike those treble damages, CUTPA punitive damages are meant to punish and deter rather than to compensate.
Discrimination claims under 46a-104. In a civil action for a discriminatory practice brought under 46a-100, the court "may grant a complainant in an action brought in accordance with section 46a-100 such legal and equitable relief which it deems appropriate including, but not limited to, temporary or permanent injunctive relief, punitive damages, attorney's fees and court costs" (46a-104). Public Act 19-16 added punitive damages to that list, effective October 1, 2019. Before that, in Tomick v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 324 Conn. 470 (2016), the Connecticut Supreme Court had concluded "that § 46a-104 does not provide for an award of punitive damages."
Elderly persons. "An elderly person who has been the victim of abuse, neglect, exploitation or abandonment, as such terms are defined in section 17b-450, may have a cause of action against any perpetrator and may recover actual and punitive damages for such abuse, neglect, exploitation or abandonment together with costs and a reasonable attorney's fee" (17b-462(a)).
Nursing home and residential care patients under 19a-550. Under the patients' bill of rights for nursing home facilities, residential care homes and chronic disease hospitals, where the deprivation of a right or benefit under that section "is found to have been wilful or in reckless disregard of the rights of the patient, punitive damages may be assessed" (19a-550(e)).
Intercepted wire communications. A person whose wire communication is intercepted, disclosed or used in violation of chapter 959a or sections 53a-187 to 53a-189 may recover actual damages "but not less than liquidated damages computed at the rate of one hundred dollars per day for each day of violation or one thousand dollars, whichever is higher; punitive damages; and a reasonable attorney's fee and other litigation costs reasonably incurred" (54-41r).
Workers' compensation retaliation under 31-290a. In a civil action by an employee discharged, disciplined or discriminated against for filing a workers' compensation claim or otherwise exercising rights under the Workers' Compensation Act, or deliberately misinformed or dissuaded from filing a claim, the court may award "any other damages caused by such discrimination or discharge," and "the court may also award punitive damages" (31-290a(b)).
Arbitration. "An arbitrator may award punitive damages or other exemplary relief if such an award is authorized by law in a civil action involving the same claim and the evidence produced at the hearing justifies the award under the legal standards otherwise applicable to the claim" (52-407uu(a)).
State police. Under 29-8a(b), the judgment and costs in the cases that section covers "shall be borne by the state only in those cases in which (1) such state policeman is ultimately found not to have acted in a wanton, reckless or malicious manner or (2) no punitive damages are ultimately assessed against such state policeman."
Does insurance pay punitive damages in Connecticut?
No Connecticut statute settles the question, and the Connecticut Supreme Court has decided it by reading the policy. In Tedesco v. Maryland Casualty Co., 127 Conn. 533 (1941), the court read a policy covering damages because of bodily injury as not covering statutory double damages. In Bodner v. United Services Automobile Assn., 222 Conn. 480 (1992), the court explained that its 1987 decision in Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. "interpreted insurance policy language substantially similar to that construed in Tedesco as covering statutory punitive damages where these had been imposed vicariously," and that "Avis' construction of the phrase 'because of ... bodily injury' overruled that of Tedesco."
Bodner then declined to read uninsured motorist coverage as reaching common-law punitive damages: "Even for common law punitive damages, as they are defined in this state, there is no discernible reason of public policy why uninsured motorist coverage should impliedly encompass a claimant's right to recover attorney's fees for pursuit of a claim against his own insurer that is premised on the egregious misconduct of the third party tortfeasor."
The U.S. Supreme Court's due-process limits on the size of punitive awards also apply to Connecticut verdicts; the punitive damages hub explains them.
Connecticut punitive damages at a glance
| Question | Connecticut rule | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Source of the remedy | Common law, plus statutes for particular claims | Waterbury Petroleum (Conn. 1984); Berry v. Loiseau (Conn. 1992) |
| Common-law standard | Reckless indifference to the rights of others or an intentional and wanton violation of those rights | Berry v. Loiseau (Conn. 1992) |
| Pleading | Wanton or wilful malicious misconduct, alleged explicitly | Markey v. Santangelo (Conn. 1985) |
| Burden of proof | Preponderance of the evidence for statutory double damages; no higher standard for common-law punitive damages | Freeman v. Alamo Management Co. (Conn. 1992) |
| Common-law amount | Litigation expenses less taxable costs | Waterbury Petroleum; Berry |
| General cap | None by statute; claim-specific limits, including $1,000 for shoplifting since October 1, 2026 | 52-240b, 35-53(b), 46a-89, 46a-98, 22-351a(c), 52-564a |
| Product sellers | Reckless disregard; court sets amount, not more than twice the damages awarded | 52-240b; Bifolck (Conn. 2016) |
| Motor vehicle violations | Double or treble damages for a pleaded, deliberate or reckless violation of a listed statute that was a substantial factor | 14-295 |
| Wrongful death | 52-555 names just damages, not punitive; 14-295 reaches wrongful death actions | 52-555(a); 14-295 |
| Breach of contract | Common-law punitive damages need a pleaded and proven independent tort (law firm fee contract case) | McCarter & English (Conn. 2025) |
| State share | No general split-recovery statute | No statute |
| Insurance | Depends on policy wording; uninsured motorist coverage does not impliedly reach common-law punitive damages | Bodner (Conn. 1992) |
Recent changes
Recent changes are mostly statutory. Public Act 26-130 raised the shoplifting punitive damages ceiling in 52-564a from $300 to $1,000, effective October 1, 2026. New causes of action that expressly allow punitive damages include 52-571q (firearm industry members, Public Act 25-43, for civil actions filed on or after October 1, 2025), a civil action against any person, including a federal or state officer or employee, who under color of law deprives a person of rights secured by the U.S. Constitution (Public Act 26-14, section 1, effective on passage in May 2026), and civil actions for the unlawful dissemination of a synthetically created intimate image (Public Act 26-55, section 1) and for female genital mutilation (Public Act 26-5, section 4), both effective October 1, 2026.
In the courts, McCarter & English, LLP v. Jarrow Formulas, Inc. (2025) required a pleaded and proven independent tort before a law firm may recover common-law punitive damages for a client's breach of contract. Later in 2025, White v. FCW Law Offices allowed CUTPA punitive damages in addition to treble damages under the identity theft statute, 52-571h(b). Public Act 19-16 added punitive damages to the relief available under 46a-104, effective October 1, 2019, and Public Act 19-160 is the most recent amendment to 14-295. Section 52-240b dates from Public Act 79-483.
Related pages
This article provides general legal information about Connecticut punitive damages law as of 2026-10-19. It is not legal advice. For advice about a specific situation, contact a lawyer licensed in Connecticut.
Last updated: 2026-10-19.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does Connecticut allow punitive damages?
Yes, in a limited form. The Connecticut Supreme Court allows common-law punitive damages for a reckless indifference to the rights of others or an intentional and wanton violation of those rights, but limits the award to the plaintiff's litigation expenses less taxable costs (Waterbury Petroleum, 1984; Berry v. Loiseau, 1992). Statutes such as 52-240b and 14-295 allow larger awards for particular claims.
Is there a cap on punitive damages in Connecticut?
There is no general statutory cap. At common law the award is limited to litigation expenses less taxable costs. By statute, product-seller punitive damages may not exceed twice the damages awarded to the plaintiff (52-240b), and other statutes set their own limits, such as twice any award under subsection (a) of 35-53, $50,000 under 46a-89(b)(2)(C) and, for shoplifting, $1,000 under 52-564a(a) since October 1, 2026.
What has to be proven for punitive damages in Connecticut?
No statute sets the burden of proof; Freeman v. Alamo Management Co. (1992) applied the preponderance of the evidence standard to statutory double damages and said no higher standard is required in a common-law punitive damages claim. At common law, the evidence must reveal a reckless indifference to the rights of others or an intentional and wanton violation of those rights (Berry v. Loiseau, 1992), and the pleadings must allege wanton or wilful malicious misconduct explicitly enough to alert the court and opposing counsel (Markey v. Santangelo, 1985). Under 52-240b, the claimant must prove the product seller's reckless disregard for the safety of product users, consumers or others.
Are double or treble damages available after a reckless driving crash in Connecticut?
Conn. Gen. Stat. 14-295 allows the trier of fact to award double or treble damages in a personal injury, wrongful death or property damage action if the injured party specifically pleads that another party deliberately or with reckless disregard violated one of the listed motor vehicle statutes, including 14-218a, 14-219, 14-222 and 14-227a (operating under the influence of liquor or drugs), and that the violation was a substantial factor in the harm.
Are punitive damages available in a Connecticut wrongful death case?
The wrongful death statute, 52-555, allows recovery of just damages and does not mention punitive damages. Section 14-295 expressly allows double or treble damages in a wrongful death action based on a pleaded, deliberate or reckless violation of a listed motor vehicle statute, and 17b-462 lets the personal representative of a deceased elderly victim bring its action for actual and punitive damages.
Does the state of Connecticut take part of a punitive damages award?
No general Connecticut statute sends part of a private punitive award to the state or a fund. One statute, 46a-89(b)(2)(C), expressly makes its punitive award payable to the complainant.
Does insurance cover punitive damages in Connecticut?
No statute settles it, so the policy wording matters. In Bodner v. United Services Automobile Assn. (1992), the Connecticut Supreme Court described Avis (1987) as reading 'because of bodily injury' to cover statutory punitive damages imposed vicariously, and held uninsured motorist coverage does not impliedly reach a claimant's common-law punitive damages.
Are punitive damages available for breach of contract in Connecticut?
In McCarter & English, LLP v. Jarrow Formulas, Inc. (2025), the Connecticut Supreme Court concluded that a law firm may not recover common-law punitive damages for its client's breach of contract unless it pleads and proves an independent tort for which punitive damages are recoverable.
Updates
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Connecticut General Statutes, Title 52 (Civil Actions), Chapter 901
§ 52-240bPunitive damages in product liability actions.In force
Punitive damages may be awarded if the claimant proves that the harm suffered was the result of the product seller's reckless disregard for the safety of product users, consumers or others who were injured by the product. If the trier of fact determines that punitive damages should be awarded, the court shall determine the amount of such damages not to exceed an amount equal to twice the damages awarded to the plaintiff.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at cga.ct.gov
Connecticut General Statutes, Title 14 (Motor Vehicles. Use of the Highway By Vehicles. Gasoline), Chapter 248
§ 14-295Double or treble damages for personal injury or property damage resulting from certain traffic violations.In force
In any civil action to recover damages resulting from personal injury, wrongful death or damage to property, the trier of fact may award double or treble damages if the injured party has specifically pleaded that another party has deliberately or with reckless disregard operated a motor vehicle in violation of section 14-218a, 14-219, 14-222, 14-227a or 14-227m, subdivision (1) or (2) of subsection (a) of section 14-227n or section 14-230, 14-234, 14-237, 14-239, 14-240a or 14-296aa, and that such violation was a substantial factor in causing such injury, death or damage to property. The owner of a rental or leased motor vehicle shall not be responsible for such damages unless the damages arose from such owner's operation of the motor vehicle.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at cga.ct.gov
Connecticut General Statutes, Title 42 (Business, Selling, Trading and Collection Practices), Chapter 735a
§ 42-110gAction for damages. Class actions. Costs and fees. Equitable relief. Jury trial.In forcecited in 3 of our articles
(a) Any person who suffers any ascertainable loss of money or property, real or personal, as a result of the use or employment of a method, act or practice prohibited by section 42-110b, may bring an action in the judicial district in which the plaintiff or defendant resides or has his principal place of business or is doing business, to recover actual damages. Proof of public interest or public injury shall not be required in any action brought under this section. The court may, in its discretion, award punitive damages and may provide such equitable relief as it deems necessary or proper. (b) Persons entitled to bring an action under subsection (a) of this section may, pursuant to rules established by the judges of the Superior Court, bring a class action on behalf of themselves and other persons similarly situated who are residents of this state or injured in this state to recover damages.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at cga.ct.gov
Cited in 636 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Hinchliffe v. American Motors Corp. (Supreme Court of Connecticut 1981, 184 Conn. 607)“…or unfair or deceptive acts or practices. (Emphasis added.) General Statutes § 42-110g (a); see General Statutes § 42-110b. Si…”
- Cheshire Mortgage Service, Inc. v. Montes (Supreme Court of Connecticut 1992, 223 Conn. 80)“…UTPA, we next turn to the defendants' remedies under CUTPA. General Statutes § 42-110g 41 provides the remedy for a *115 CUT…”
- Jackson v. R. G. Whipple, Inc. (Supreme Court of Connecticut 1993, 225 Conn. 705)“…f clients. Id., 531 . Because that case was decided when General Statutes § 42-110g of CUTPA still contained a public impac…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Connecticut Scam and Fraud Laws: Where to Report and CUTPA (2026), Connecticut Data Breach Notification Laws: Reporting Rules & Timelines (2026)
Connecticut General Statutes, Title 46a (Human Rights), Chapter 814c
§ 46a-104Civil action for discriminatory practice: Relief.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
The court may grant a complainant in an action brought in accordance with section 46a-100 such legal and equitable relief which it deems appropriate including, but not limited to, temporary or permanent injunctive relief, punitive damages, attorney's fees and court costs. The amount of attorney's fees allowed shall not be contingent upon the amount of damages requested by or awarded to the complainant.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at cga.ct.gov
Also relied on in: Wrongful Termination in Connecticut (2026): Laws, Deadlines, How to File
§ 46a-89(Formerly Sec. 31-127a). Petition for temporary injunctive relief re discriminatory employment practices. Petition for injunctive relief, punitive damages or civil penalty re discriminatory housing or public accommodations practices.In force
(a)(1) Whenever a complaint filed pursuant to section 46a-82 alleges a violation of section 46a-60 or 46a-81c, and the executive director believes that equitable relief is required to prevent irreparable harm to the complainant, the commission may bring a petition in the superior court for the judicial district of Hartford, the judicial district in which the discriminatory practice which is the subject of the complaint occurred or the judicial district in which the respondent resides, provided this subdivision shall not apply to complaints against employers with less than fifty employees. (2) The petition shall seek appropriate temporary injunctive relief against the respondent pending final disposition of the complaint pursuant to the procedures set forth in this chapter. The injunctive relief may include an order temporarily restraining the respondent from doing any act that would render ineffectual any order a presiding officer may render with respect to the complaint.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at cga.ct.gov
§ 46a-98(Formerly Sec. 36-438a). Discriminatory credit practice: Cause of action; damages; statute of limitations.In force
(a) In lieu of, but not in addition to, filing a complaint with the commission pursuant to section 46a-82, any person claiming to be aggrieved by a violation of section 46a-66 or 46a-81f may bring an action under this section against a creditor, as defined in section 46a-65, in the superior court for the judicial district in which such aggrieved person resides or in which the alleged violation took place. (b) Any such creditor who fails to comply with any requirement of section 46a-66 or 46a-81f or the regulations adopted pursuant to section 46a-67 shall be liable to an aggrieved person in an amount equal to the sum of any actual damages sustained by such person. (c) Any such creditor who fails to comply with any requirement of section 46a-66 or 46a-81f or the regulations adopted pursuant to section 46a-67 shall be liable to an aggrieved person for punitive damages in an amount not greater than one thousand dollars, as determined by the court, in addition to any actual damages provided in subsection (b) of this section.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at cga.ct.gov
Connecticut General Statutes, Title 35 (Trade Regulations, Trademarks and Collective and Certification Marks), Chapter 625
§ 35-53Damages. Punitive damages for wilful and malicious misappropriation.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
(a) In addition to or in lieu of injunctive relief, a complainant may recover damages for the actual loss caused by misappropriation. A complainant also may recover for the unjust enrichment caused by misappropriation that is not taken into account in computing damages for actual loss. (b) In any action brought pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, if the court finds wilful and malicious misappropriation, the court may award punitive damages in an amount not exceeding twice any award made under subsection (a) and may award reasonable attorney's fees to the prevailing party.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at cga.ct.gov
Cited in 20 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Smith v. Snyder (Supreme Court of Connecticut 2004, 267 Conn. 456)“…on law. The punitive damages provision of that act, namely, General Statutes § 35-53 (b), provides: “In any action brought p…”
- Harty v. Cantor Fitzgerald and Co. (Supreme Court of Connecticut 2005, 275 Conn. 72)“…51a; General Statutes § 31-51q; General Statutes § 31-290a; General Statutes § 35-53; General Statutes § 42-110g; General St…”
- Elm City Cheese Co. v. Federico (Supreme Court of Connecticut 1999, 251 Conn. 59)“…awarded Elm City $300,000 in punitive damages, pursuant to General Statutes § 35-53 (b). 11 Subsequently, the trial court,…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Connecticut Trade Secret Laws: UTSA, Remedies & Deadlines
Connecticut General Statutes, Title 17b (Social Services), Chapter 319dd
§ 17b-462Cause of action by elderly victim. Civil attachment jurisdiction.In force
(a) An elderly person who has been the victim of abuse, neglect, exploitation or abandonment, as such terms are defined in section 17b-450, may have a cause of action against any perpetrator and may recover actual and punitive damages for such abuse, neglect, exploitation or abandonment together with costs and a reasonable attorney's fee. The action may be brought by the elderly person, or the elderly person's guardian or conservator, by a person or organization acting on behalf of the elderly person with the consent of such elderly person or the elderly person's guardian or conservator, or by the personal representative of the estate of a deceased elderly victim. (b) In any action to recover damages based upon a claim of exploitation, as defined in section 17b-450, the Superior Court shall have jurisdiction to render an order pursuant to chapter 904 prohibiting the defendant from transferring, depleting or otherwise alienating or diminishing any funds, assets or property.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at cga.ct.gov
Connecticut General Statutes, Title 19a (Public Health and Well-Being), Chapter 368v
§ 19a-550(Formerly Sec. 19-622). Patients' bill of rights.In force
(a)(1) As used in this section, (A) “nursing home facility” has the same meaning as provided in section 19a-521, and (B) “residential care home” has the same meaning as provided in section 19a-521; and (2) for the purposes of subsections (c) and (d) of this section, and subsection (b) of section 19a-537, “medically contraindicated” means a comprehensive evaluation of the impact of a potential room transfer on the patient's physical, mental and psychosocial well-being, which determines that the transfer would cause new symptoms or exacerbate present symptoms beyond a reasonable adjustment period resulting in a prolonged or significant negative outcome that could not be ameliorated through care plan intervention, as documented by a physician, physician assistant or an advanced practice registered nurse in a patient's medical record. (b) There is established a patients' bill of rights for any person admitted as a patient to any nursing home facility, residential care home or chronic disease hospital. The patients' bill of rights shall be implemented in accordance with the provisions of Sections 1919(b), 1919(c), 1919(c)(2), 1919(c)(2)(D) and 1919(c)(2)(E) of the Social Security Act.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at cga.ct.gov
Connecticut General Statutes, Title 54 (Criminal Procedure), Chapter 959a
§ 54-41rRemedies of party intercepted; defense.In forcecited in 4 of our articles
Any person whose wire communication is intercepted, disclosed or used in violation of this chapter or of sections 53a-187 to 53a-189, inclusive, shall (1) have a civil cause of action against any person who intercepts, discloses or uses, or procures any other person to intercept, disclose or use, such communication, and (2) be entitled to recover from any such person actual damages but not less than liquidated damages computed at the rate of one hundred dollars per day for each day of violation or one thousand dollars, whichever is higher; punitive damages; and a reasonable attorney's fee and other litigation costs reasonably incurred. A good faith reliance on a court order shall constitute a complete defense to any civil or criminal action brought in accordance with the provisions of this chapter or any other law.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at cga.ct.gov
Cited in 9 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Brown (Connecticut Appellate Court 1988, 14 Conn. App. 605)“…and enabling him promptly to seek his civil remedies under General Statutes § 54-41r.” State v. Formica, supra, 482-83…”
- State v. McVeigh (Supreme Court of Connecticut 1993, 224 Conn. 593)“…ure or use of his unlawfully intercepted conversations. See General Statutes § 54-41r. 25 We do not believe that the legisla…”
- State v. Formica (Connecticut Appellate Court 1985, 3 Conn. App. 477)“…and enabling him promptly to seek his civil remedies under General Statutes § 54-41r. A strict reading of the inventory se…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Connecticut Audio Recording Laws: Mixed Consent Rules and Penalties (2026), Connecticut Phone Call Recording Laws: All-Party Consent Rules and Penalties (2026), Connecticut Recording Laws (2026): Hybrid Consent Rules Explained
Connecticut General Statutes, Title 31 (Labor), Chapter 568
§ 31-290aDischarge, discipline or discrimination prohibited. Misinformation or dissuasion prohibited. Right of action.In forcecited in 4 of our articles
(a) No employer who is subject to the provisions of this chapter shall: (1) Discharge or cause to be discharged, or in any manner discipline or discriminate against any employee because the employee has filed a claim for workers' compensation benefits or otherwise exercised the rights afforded to him pursuant to the provisions of this chapter, or (2) deliberately misinform or deliberately dissuade an employee from filing a claim for workers' compensation benefits or, on or after October 1, 2021, a claim for payment of benefits from the Connecticut Essential Workers COVID-19 Assistance Fund.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at cga.ct.gov
Cited in 195 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Ford v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Connecticut, Inc. (Supreme Court of Connecticut 1990, 216 Conn. 40)“…ns of proof in an action brought by an employee pursuant to General Statutes § 31-290a, 1 alleging wrongful termination of em…”
- Genovese v. Gallo Wine Merchants, Inc. (Supreme Court of Connecticut 1993, 226 Conn. 475)“…tory cause of action for retaliatory discharge, pursuant to General Statutes § 31-290a, 1 is precluded by virtue of the doctr…”
- Sorrentino v. All Seasons Services, Inc. (Supreme Court of Connecticut 1998, 245 Conn. 756)“…damages for a retaliatory discharge by his or her employer. General Statutes § 31-290a. 1 In this appeal, the principal issue…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Connecticut At-Will Employment Laws: Exceptions and Your Rights, Connecticut Whistleblower Laws: Protections and How to Report
Connecticut General Statutes, Title 52 (Civil Actions), Chapter 909
§ 52-407uuRemedies, fees and expenses of arbitration proceeding.In force
(a) An arbitrator may award punitive damages or other exemplary relief if such an award is authorized by law in a civil action involving the same claim and the evidence produced at the hearing justifies the award under the legal standards otherwise applicable to the claim. (b) An arbitrator may award reasonable attorney's fees and other reasonable expenses of arbitration if such an award is authorized by law in a civil action involving the same claim or by the agreement of the parties to the arbitration proceeding. (c) As to all remedies other than those authorized by subsections (a) and (b) of this section, an arbitrator may order such remedies as the arbitrator considers just and appropriate under the circumstances of the arbitration proceeding. (d) An arbitrator's expenses and fees, together with other expenses, must be paid as provided in the award. (e) If an arbitrator awards punitive damages or other exemplary relief under subsection (a) of this section, the arbitrator shall specify in the award the basis in fact justifying and the basis in law authorizing the award and state separately the amount of the punitive damages or other exemplary relief.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at cga.ct.gov
Connecticut General Statutes, Title 22 (Agriculture. Domestic Animals), Chapter 435
§ 22-351aLiability for intentionally killing or injuring companion animal.In force
(a) For the purposes of this section, “companion animal” means a domesticated dog or cat that is normally kept in or near the household of its owner or keeper and is dependent on a person for food, shelter and veterinary care, but does not include a dog or cat kept for farming or biomedical research practices. (b) Any person who intentionally kills or injures a companion animal, except in defense of such person or another person or as otherwise authorized by law, shall be liable to the owner of such companion animal for economic damages sustained by such owner including, but not limited to, expenses of veterinary care, the fair monetary value of the companion animal and burial expenses for the companion animal. (c) In addition to any economic damages awarded pursuant to subsection (b) of this section, and except as provided in subsection (d) of this section, the court may award punitive damages in an amount not to exceed the jurisdictional monetary limit established by subdivision (1) of subsection (d) of section 51-15, together with a reasonable attorney's fee.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at cga.ct.gov
Connecticut General Statutes, Title 52 (Civil Actions), Chapter 925
§ 52-564aLiability for shoplifting.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
(a) Any person eighteen years of age or older or an emancipated minor who takes possession of goods or merchandise displayed or offered for sale by any mercantile establishment, or who takes from any real property any agricultural produce kept, grown or raised on the property for purposes of sale, without the consent of the owner and with the intention of converting such goods, merchandise or produce to his own use without having paid the purchase price thereof, or who alters the price indicia of such goods or merchandise, shall be liable in a civil action to the owner of the goods, merchandise or produce for (1) the actual and reasonable costs of maintaining the action, including court costs and a reasonable attorney's fee, (2) the retail value of the goods, merchandise or produce taken, if not recovered by the time of the commencement of the action or if recovered in an unmerchantable condition, and (3) punitive damages in an amount not to exceed three hundred dollars. (b) A conviction of larceny by shoplifting, as defined in subdivision (9) of section 53a-119, shall not be a condition precedent to the maintenance of a civil action under this section.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at cga.ct.gov
Also relied on in: Connecticut Larceny Laws: Felony Threshold, Degrees and Shoplifting
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- Waterbury Petroleum Products, Inc. v. Canaan Oil & Fuel Co., 193 Conn. 208, 477 A.2d 988 (1984)(www.courtlistener.com)
- Berry v. Loiseau, 223 Conn. 786, 614 A.2d 414 (1992)(www.courtlistener.com)
- Conn. Gen. Stat. 52-240b: Punitive damages in product liability actions (chapter 901)(www.cga.ct.gov).gov
- Conn. Gen. Stat. 14-295: Double or treble damages (chapter 248)(www.cga.ct.gov).gov
- Markey v. Santangelo, 195 Conn. 76 (1985)(www.courtlistener.com)
- McCarter & English, LLP v. Jarrow Formulas, Inc., 351 Conn. 186 (2025)(www.courtlistener.com)
- Bifolck v. Philip Morris, Inc., 324 Conn. 402, 152 A.3d 1183 (2016)(www.courtlistener.com)
- Conn. Gen. Stat. 35-53 (chapter 625)(www.cga.ct.gov).gov
- Conn. Gen. Stat. 46a-89, 46a-98 and 46a-104 (chapter 814c)(www.cga.ct.gov).gov
- Conn. Gen. Stat. 22-351a: Liability for intentionally killing or injuring companion animal (chapter 435)(www.cga.ct.gov).gov
- Conn. Gen. Stat. 51-15: Small claims (chapter 870)(www.cga.ct.gov).gov
- Conn. Gen. Stat. 52-555 and 52-564a (chapter 925)(www.cga.ct.gov).gov
- Conn. Gen. Stat. 52-599: Survival of actions (chapter 927)(www.cga.ct.gov).gov
- Conn. Gen. Stat. 17b-462 (chapter 319dd)(www.cga.ct.gov).gov
- Conn. Gen. Stat. 42-110g: Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (chapter 735a)(www.cga.ct.gov).gov
- Conn. Gen. Stat. 19a-550 (chapter 368v)(www.cga.ct.gov).gov
- Conn. Gen. Stat. 54-41r (chapter 959a)(www.cga.ct.gov).gov
- Conn. Gen. Stat. 31-290a (chapter 568)(www.cga.ct.gov).gov
- Conn. Gen. Stat. 52-407uu: Arbitrator remedies (chapter 909)(www.cga.ct.gov).gov
- Conn. Gen. Stat. 29-8a (chapter 529)(www.cga.ct.gov).gov
- Tedesco v. Maryland Casualty Co., 127 Conn. 533 (1941)(www.courtlistener.com)
- Bodner v. United Services Automobile Assn., 222 Conn. 480 (1992)(www.courtlistener.com)
- Freeman v. Alamo Management Co., 221 Conn. 674 (1992)(static.case.law)
- Tomick v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 324 Conn. 470, 153 A.3d 615 (2016)(www.courtlistener.com)
- Connecticut Public Act 26-130, section 3 (amending 52-564a, effective October 1, 2026)(www.cga.ct.gov).gov
- Connecticut Public Act 26-14, section 1 (civil action for deprivation of constitutional rights)(www.cga.ct.gov).gov
- Connecticut Public Act 26-55, section 1 (synthetically created intimate images)(www.cga.ct.gov).gov
- Connecticut Public Act 26-5, section 4 (female genital mutilation civil action)(www.cga.ct.gov).gov
- Conn. Gen. Stat. 52-571q: Action based on act or omission by firearm industry member (2026 Supplement, chapter 925)(www.cga.ct.gov).gov
- Connecticut Public Act 19-16, section 10 (amending 46a-104, effective October 1, 2019)(www.cga.ct.gov).gov
- White v. FCW Law Offices, 352 Conn. 718 (2025)(courtlistener.com)
Paid attorney referral. RecordingLaw may receive compensation when you use an attorney-help link. RecordingLaw is not a law firm. Submitting a request does not guarantee that an attorney will accept your case and does not create an attorney-client relationship.