1994 Formal Opinions

Page 1 of 3

  • Hon. Donald F. Miller, Commissioner of Revenue Services, 1994-019 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

    This is in response to your letter dated January 31, 1994, in which you request a formal opinion of the Attorney General concerning an issue relating to the jurisdiction of the tax review committee (hereinafter "the committee") under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-3a. Please advise me whether the tax review committee has statutory authority to consider and to waive any penalty in excess of one hundred dollars that the Commissioner of Revenue Services has determined not to waive.

  • James A. Gasecki, Sheriffs' Advisory Board, 1994-016 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

    In your letter of March 15, 1994, you indicate that in two lawsuits, Kennedy St. George v. Mak, Case No. 5:92-CV-00587(JAC), United States District Court, District of Connecticut, and Lewis v. Mak, Case No. 5:92-CV-00593(JAC), United States District Court, District of Connecticut, the Attorney General's Office has advised the High Sheriff of Fairfield County and several persons in his department that it would be inappropriate for the Attorney General's Office to continue to represent them in those cases. Consequently, on behalf of the Sheriffs' Advisory Board you have asked for legal advice on the following question: Does the Sheriff's Advisory Board have authority to appropriate funds for the defense of sheriffs, deputy sheriffs and special deputy sheriffs in lawsuits brought against them in their individual capacities after the Attorney General has determined that providing a defense would be inappropriate pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat.

  • Janice Thibodeau, R.N. , Board of Examiners for Nursing , 1994-004 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

    This is in response to an October 19, 1993 request for an opinion regarding the prescriptive authority of advanced practice registered nurses ("APRNs"), which request was generated by Marie Hilliard, the Board's Executive Officer. The question is whether APRNs have prescriptive authority in a private practice setting.

  • Jesse M. Frankl, Workers' Compensation Commission, 1994-030 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

    This is in response to your letter dated June 30, 1994, in which you requested our opinion regarding whether the proposed Safety and Health Regulations, drafted pursuant to Conn. Pub. Acts No. 93-228

  • John W. Shannahan , Connecticut Historical Commission , 1994-020 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

    You have asked our opinion on whether the Connecticut Historical Commission may establish gift shops in historic properties that are maintained by the Commission for the purpose of generating revenues to be used to help defray the costs associated with the operation of the properties.

  • Johnston and Jaekle, Auditors of Public Accounts, 1994-018 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

    In your letter of April 26, 1994, you asked several questions concerning the responsibility of the Southern New England Telephone Company ("SNET") for state-owned telecommunications equipment that was stolen from a SNET truck. You have informed us that the University of Connecticut (the "University"), which owns the equipment, did not pursue a claim against SNET, and you have asked two questions: First: Does SNET have responsibility for State equipment in its custody?; and, Second: If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, is there a valid c1aim against SNET? http://www.cslib.org/attygenl/images/rainbow.gif

  • Kevin P. Johnston & Robert G. Jaekle, Auditors of Public Accounts, 1994-002 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

    By letter dated August 17, 1993, you have asked our office as to the appropriateness of compensating a public member of the Commission on Hospitals and Health Care, Gwen B. Weltman, for the period September 4, 1992 to June 3, 1993.

  • Representative Luby and Senator Eads, General Assembly, 1994-023 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

    You have requested our advice regarding the interpretation of Conn. Gen. Stat. 17a-17 and regulations promulgated thereunder. These provisions require the Commissioner of Children and Families and the Commissioner of Education to jointly develop regulations to implement "a single cost accounting system" which is the system of determining payment for room, board and education to private residential treatment centers.

  • Richard A. Silver, Judicial Selection Commission, 1994-021 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

    In your letter of May 12, 1994, you ask about the applicability of Conn. Gen. Stat. 51-44a(j) (non-disclosure of information)1 to evidence introduced at a "hearing" conducted by the Judicial Selection Commission (JSC) as required by 51-44a(e) (procedure for reappointment of judge to same court).

  • Secretary Kezer and Speaker Ritter, State Capitol, 1994-025 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

    We have received an inquiry from each of you relating to persons currently serving as justice of the peace. We first answer the Secretary's question and then that raised by the Speaker. 1. In a May 24, 1994, letter from Secretary Kezer, the Secretary inquires as to the validity of legislation providing for the extension of terms of current justices of the peace in light of Judge Dorsey's ruling in ACP v. Kezer, 2:92CV00550 (PCD) prohibiting holdover-terms after June 30, 1994. We answer that the legislation extending these terms is valid. 2. In an August 1, 1994, letter from Speaker Ritter, the Speaker asks whether "it is proper to fill vacancies which now exist" in the office of justice of the peace.

  • Senators Larson, DiBella, Eads and Representatives Ritter, Luby and Krawiecki, State Capitol, 1994-010 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

    By letter dated April 27, 1994, you have asked for the opinion of this Office as to whether the Governor had the authority to bind the State to the Gaming Compact between the State of Connecticut and the Mohegan Tribe of Indians pursuant to the provisions of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) Pub.L. 100-497, 25 U.S.C. 2701 or whether the Gaming Compact must also be submitted to the General Assembly for its approval.

  • Susan S. Addiss, MPH MUrS, Department of Public Health & Addiction Services, 1994-015 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

    Prior to the merger of the Department of Health Services and the former Connecticut Alcohol and Drug Abuse Commission (CADAC), the Executive Director of CADAC, Dr. John Higgins-Biddle, requested a formal opinion from this Office regarding the impact of the federal regulations concerning confidentiality of alcohol and drug abuse patient records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, or any other pertinent state or federal law or regulation related to patient confidentiality, on a new data system that CADAC was having designed by Andersen Consulting, Inc. After the merger of CADAC into the Department of Public Health and Addiction Services (DPHAS),1 you informed us that your Department is continuing with the development of the proposed data system, that the merger has not affected either the scope or nature of Dr. Higgins-Biddle's previous opinion request, and that you still need advice regarding the questions that he originally posed

  • Susan S. Addiss, MPH, MUrS, Department of Public Health and Addiction Services, 1994-008 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

    You have sought our advice regarding the issue of whether a hospital which has been licensed as a chronic disease hospital may be issued a second chronic disease hospital license for a discrete portion of its premises which it intends to operate as a rehabilitation unit.

  • Susan Shimelman , Secretary, Office of Policy and Management , 1994-022 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

    By letter dated July 6, 1994, your office made an inquiry pertaining to 15 of 1994 Conn. Pub. Act No. 94-6 of the May Special Session (hereinafter the "1994 Act"). The July 6, 1994 letter phrased the question as follows: Subsequent to your legal opinion of May 24, 1994, the General Assembly passed Public Act 94-6(15), copy enclosed, which provides for a definition of 'Free Standing Chronic Disease Hospitals' applicable retroactively to the fiscal year commencing July 1, 1993. As a result of this amendment, we respectfully request a formal opinion on the impact this revision has in relationship to the grand list year and fiscal year Free Standing Chronic Disease Hospitals payments should commence.

  • Emil H. Frankel , Department of Transportation , 1994-005 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

    This is in response to your letter dated December 1, 1993, in which you request our opinion on whether the Department of Transportation's use of on-call consultants is contrary to the requirements of Sections 13b-20b through 13b-20l of the Connecticut General Statutes. http://www.cslib.org/attygenl/images/rainbow.gif