Attorney General: Opinions
Opinions

2005 Formal Opinions
12/22/2005Honorable Pam Law, Commissioner of Revenue Services, 2005-033, Formal Opinion, Richard Blumenthal, Attorney General, State of Connecticut
  You have asked for an opinion whether non-profit employers’ mutual insurance associations under Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 31-328 to 31-339 (“Mutual Association Statutes”) are “insurance companies” within the meaning of Conn. Gen. Stat. §12-201(4) and are therefore subject to the Connecticut insurance premium tax, Conn. Gen. Stat. §§12-201 to 12-212a (“Connecticut Premium Tax”).
 
12/6/2005Leo Belval, Appeal Panel Chairman, Codes and Standards Committee, 2005-032, Formal Opinion, Attorney General, State of Connecticut
  You have requested our advice regarding the scope of the State Building Inspector's authority over local building officials.
 
11/9/2005Honorable Robert L. Genuario, Secretary, Office of Policy and Management, 2005-031, Formal Opinion, Attorney General State of Connecticut
  In my opinion, there is no legal distinction between a PSA and a POS, even though the Office of Policy and Management (“OPM”) may choose to establish certain administrative procedures treating these types of agreements differently; they are both valid vehicles for entering into binding State contracts.
 
11/8/2005Honorable Shaun B. Cashman, Commissioner, Dept. of Labor, Formal Opinion 2005-030, Attorney General of Connecticut
  This will acknowledge and reply to your request on behalf of the State Apprenticeship Council (SAC) for a formal opinion concerning the propriety of the issuance of apprenticeship registrations by an agency other than the Department of Labor (DOL), in particular the State Apprenticeship Council (SAC) or the Department of Consumer Protection (DCP).
 
10/24/2005Honorable Louis C. DeLuca, Senate Republican Leader, 2005-029, Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  You have requested an opinion as to whether the provisions of Public Act No. 05-107, An Act Protecting Consumers in the Making of Income Tax Refund Anticipation Loans (Act), and in particular the provision limiting the interest rate on income tax refund anticipation loans, are enforceable (a) against national banks doing business in Connecticut or (b) against "facilitators" of such loans by national banks.
 
10/18/2005Honorable James A. Amman, Speaker of the House and Honorable Christopher G. Donovan, House Majority Leader, 2005-028, Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  You have requested a formal opinion whether the Department of Revenue Services (DRS) is required to release certain tax documents and information to the Legislative Program Review and Investigations Committee (Committee) in connection with the Committee’s study of Connecticut’s tax system. In addition, you ask, if we conclude that DRS is required to provide the Committee such documents and information, may the Committee permit access to an outside consultant with which the Committee may contract to conduct a compilation and analysis of the tax data.
 
10/17/2005Commissioner Shaun B. Cashman, 2005-027, Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  Your department has asked for advice on the payment of wages to service workers employed by contractors of the state or vendors supplying services to state contractors. You ask if the standard wage rate provisions of Conn. Gen. Stat. §31-57f apply to contracts between the state and management companies and between management companies and their vendors under various scenarios.
 
10/14/2005Honorable Patricia Wilson-Coker, Commissioner, 2005-026, Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  I write to advise you that you can and should release all information concerning provider rate reimbursement. You have the authority to disclose such provider rate reimbursement information that has been produced to you by Medicaid Managed Care Organizations (“MCOs”). You should reject assertions by the MCOs that the information must be kept confidential under the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) and the terms of their contracts with the Department of Social Services (“DSS”).
 
9/27/2005Representative Robert M. Ward, 2005-025, Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  You have requested a formal legal opinion concerning the protections afforded to members of the General Assembly by Conn. Gen. Stat. § 2-3a, which prohibits discrimination in the workplace against those who hold the office of state senator or representative.
 
9/20/2005Honorable J. Robert Galvin, 2005-024 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  This letter is in response to a request from Elizabeth Frugale, Registrar of Vital Records, for a legal opinion as to whether Connecticut courts will recognize out-of-state civil unions, same-sex marriages and same-sex domestic partnerships after Connecticut's Act Concerning Civil Unions, 2005 Conn. Pub. Act No. 05-10 (the "Act" or "P.A. 05-10"), takes effect on October 1, 2005. In particular, Ms. Frugale has asked whether, after October 1st, a couple that has entered into a civil union, same-sex marriage, or domestic partnership out-of-state may legally enter into a civil union in Connecticut with the same partner.1 Because this issue is of statewide interest and importance, we are addressing our response to you in the form of a formal legal opinion.
 
9/7/2005Honorable J. Robert Galvin, M.D., M.P.H., 2005-023 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  Your department has requested our opinion as to the authority of a local health department to conduct warrantless inspections and its authority to issue "hold" orders on food items.
 
9/7/2005Honorable J. Robert Galvin, M.D., M.P.H., 2005-022 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  Your department has requested advice on whether marriages performed on the Mashantucket Pequot Indian Reservation in Ledyard are valid under state law.
 
8/12/2005James F. Abromaitis, Commissioner, Department of Economic And Community Development, 2005-021 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  In your letter dated June 7, 2005, you have asked for advice concerning the length of time for which accessory apartments must be deed-restricted for affordable housing to allow such apartments to be considered in determining whether a town has sufficient existing affordable housing to qualify for a temporary moratorium pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 8-30g(l). According to your letter, the Town of Trumbull has submitted an application for a moratorium which includes 106 ten year deed restricted accessory apartments.
 
8/10/2005Honorable Theresa C. Lantz, Commissioner, Department of Correction, 2005-020 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  You have requested our advice on whether you have the authority to place offenders serving sentences of two years or less into halfway houses pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 18-100c prior to completion of one-half of their sentences. You also seek our advice on whether you are prevented, by statute, from transferring offenders serving sentences greater than two years to a halfway house prior to completion of one-half of the sentence imposed.
 
7/28/2005The Honorable Donald E. Williams, Senate President Pro Tempore and the Honorable Martin M. Looney, Senate Majority Leader, 2005-019 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  This letter is in response to your request for a formal legal opinion as to whether Executive Order No. 7 (the "Order") establishing a State Contracting Standards Board (the "Board") is unconstitutional, in whole or in part, as a violation of the separation of powers clause of article second of the state Constitution.
 
7/8/2005The Honorable James T. Fleming Commissioner, 2005-018 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  You have asked several questions about the propriety of a possible transaction between the Department of Public Works ("DPW") and the Eastern Connecticut State University Foundation, Inc. ("Foundation") whereby the DPW would agree via a lease/purchase agreement to purchase the "Foster building" in Willimantic, Connecticut, which was donated by the Foster family to the Foundation on or about December 15, 2000.
 
7/8/2005Brian Sigman, Executive Director, Board of Education and Services for the Blind, 2005-017 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  You have asked whether the Board of Education and Services for the Blind ("BESB") has the authority under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 10-303 to seek to provide all the food services that Central Connecticut State University ("CCSU") determines are desirable at the University if BESB decides it wants to pursue that location for the placement of blind vendor operated food service facilities.
 
7/1/2005Gerald E. Farrell, Jr., Chairman, State Marshal Commission, , 2005-016 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  As Chairman of the State Marshal Commission you have requested a formal Opinion of the Attorney General as to the following two questions: 1. Are the two ex officio, nonvoting members of the State Marshal Advisory Board, appointed pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 6-38b(a), entitled to attend executive sessions of the State Marshal Commission’s meetings? 2. If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, are they entitled to attend all executive sessions, or are there executive sessions they are not entitled to attend? Specifically, are ex officio members entitled to attend executive sessions regarding personnel and disciplinary matters?
 
6/24/2005Commissioner Leonard Boyle, Department of Public Safety, 2005-015 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  Your department has requested a formal opinion concerning the following questions: “What impact, if any, does the placement of a lis pendens against property (real estate) have upon the bond limit set for a properly licensed and authorized bondsman, when the property in question has been designated as an asset by the bondsman in the calculation of their authorized bond limit?”
 
5/23/2005The Honorable Valerie F. Lewis, Commissioner of Higher Education, Department of Higher Education, 2005-014 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  In your letter of November 1, 2004, you have asked our opinion whether Teikyo Post University should continue to be considered eligible to participate in the Connecticut Independent College Student Grant Program given that on or about October 22, 2004 the University was sold to a group of private investors who will, contrary to prior practice, operate the University as a "for profit" entity.
 
5/18/2005Theresa C. Lantz, Commissioner, Department of Correction, 2005-013 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  You have requested our advice on whether the Department of Correction should continue to follow its procedure of initiating speedy trial paperwork for an arrest warrant that has not been served. You advised us that the Court Operations Division of the Judicial Branch sent you a memorandum in which they indicate that the right to a speedy trial does not apply to an arrest warrant that has not been served
 
5/16/2005Edwin R. Rodriguez, Commissioner of Consumer Protection, Chairman, Liquor Control Commission, 2005-012 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  This is in response to your request for an opinion on whether it would be lawful, under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 30-77(b), for students at Connecticut College to form a brewing club for the purpose of making beer on the college campus in New London, Connecticut, without a liquor permit required by the Liquor Control Act. Consumption would be restricted to persons over the age of twenty-one.
 
5/11/2005Ms. Darlene Perez, Administrator, Teachers' Retirement Board, 2005-011 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  This is to respond to your request for advice of December 15, 2004 which asks if a participating board of education may charge an administrative fee in addition to the insurance premium charged for coverage selected by a retired teacher. This retiree receives a pension from the State Teachers' Retirement System, but is also covered by health insurance through the retiree's last employing board of education.
 
4/15/2005Susan F. Cogswell, Insurance Commissioner, Department of Insurance, 2005-010 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  You have asked whether the exclusion under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 38a-860(f)(2)(D)(iii) of the Connecticut Life and Health Insurance Guaranty Association Act ("Act") applies to an excess loss health insurance policy issued by Legion Insurance Company ("Legion"), an insurance carrier that is in liquidation, to ProFlow, Inc. ("ProFlow"), a Connecticut corporation, which procured the policy as part of its health benefits plan for its employees.
 
4/13/2005The Honorable M. Jodi Rell, Governor, State of Connecticut, 2005-009 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  This letter responds to your request for a formal opinion on two questions that have arisen in connection with Substitute Senate Bill No. 963, "An Act Concerning Civil Unions" (File No. 24), passed by the Senate on April 6, 2005, and soon to be considered by the House of Representatives.
 
3/14/2005Donald A. Browne, Esq., Executive Director, Judicial Review Council, 2005-008 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  This letter is in response to your request for a formal legal opinion concerning the authority of the Judicial Review Council (the "Council") to initiate investigations into judicial conduct. Specifically, you question whether the Council "may proceed to independently initiate an investigation based on information discovered by the Council." Such information might "include an anonymous complaint or other information which becomes known to the Council, other than through a notarized complaint." If the Council may initiate an investigation based on such information, you question what the applicable procedures are.
 
3/1/2005Robert M. Ward, House Minority Leader, House of Representatives, 2005-007 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  You have asked for a formal opinion regarding the possible consequences of enacting Substitute House Bill 6438, An Act Extending Husky Plan, Part A Benefits for Parents and Needy Caretaker Relatives. The proposed Bill would temporarily continue the Medicaid eligibility of individuals whose eligibility for Medicaid under the Transitional Medical Assistance ("TMA") coverage group will end between March 31, 2005 and May 31, 2005. Eligibility for this group of individuals would be extended through June 30, 2005 under the proposed Bill. You inquire whether or not this proposed temporary extension of benefits may "ultimately allow these adults to qualify for any additional extension under federal law?"
 
2/15/2005The Honorable Patricia Wilson-Coker, Department of Social Services, 2005-006 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  This is in response to your request for an Attorney General's Opinion on whether the disclosure by the Department of Social Services ("DSS") to the Offices of the Connecticut Attorney General and the Connecticut Child Advocate of information concerning Medicaid medical assistance recipients, to be used in an investigation into the liability of insurance companies for the cost of services paid for by Medicaid, is provided for purposes directly connected with the administration of the Medicaid program, and is fully permitted by federal law.
 
2/4/2005Honorable Theresa Lantz, Commissioner, Department of Correcticon, 2005-005 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  You have asked for a formal opinion on whether you have the authority to continue a long standing practice of allowing "local law enforcement agencies and certain state agencies to use Department of Correction (DOC) firing ranges in order to maintain appropriate certifications for their officers." These ranges are located on the grounds of the Cheshire and Enfield Correctional Institutions." In the past, these agreements were informal, but you indicate that you believe formal written agreements are necessary if the practice is to continue.
 
2/3/2005William A. Cugno, Lieutenant General, The Adjutant General, Connecticut Military Department, and The Honorable Nancy Wyman, Comptroller, 2005-004 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  You have each separately requested the opinion of the Attorney General concerning the eligibility of Connecticut state employees to receive retirement credit under Connecticut General Statutes §§ 5-192i(j) and 5-192j(d)1 for periods of full-time National Guard service in the armed forces of the United States. Such service may occur both while an individual is employed by the State of Connecticut, during periods of extended military leave, and, if the service occurred in time of war as defined by Connecticut General Statutes § 27-103, or qualifies as national emergency service, as defined by law, during periods of time which may have preceded an individual's state employment.
 
1/26/2005The Honorable Denise L. Nappier, Office of the Treasurer, 2005-003 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  Through your General Counsel, Catherine E. LaMarr, you requested an opinion of this Office on a matter concerning the Second Injury Fund and its assessment audit program. At issue is the meaning of the statutory language "from the date the sum should have been paid" with respect to the statutory interest penalty in Conn. Gen. Stat. §31-354(a). You indicate that the Fund has been applying the statutory interest penalty from the beginning of the audit period on any unpaid amounts resulting from accounting errors, reporting errors, or otherwise.
 
1/4/2005Paul A. Young, Executive Director, Division of Special Revenue, 2005-002 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  This is in response to the request for an opinion from your agency on the legality of devices known as "three button slot machines," and whether these devices fall within the definition of "video facsimile" as used in the agreements between the State of Connecticut and the Mashantucket Pequot Tribe and Mohegan Tribe. The agreements require the tribes to contribute twenty-five percent of their gross operating revenues from the operation of video facsimile machines at the tribal casinos, provided no other person within the state may lawfully operate "video facsimile games or other commercial casino games."
 
1/3/2005Robert S. Rudewicz, Director of Operations, State Marshal Commission, 2005-001 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut
  You have requested our advice regarding the State Marshal Commission's course of action regarding auditing the records of a deceased marshal. You advised us in your letter that the daughter of a deceased marshal inquired of your office as to whether or not she could "continue to collect on wage executions," which collection had apparently been commenced by her deceased father but had not been completed at the time of his death.