Formal Opinions
Page 11 of 42
-
Honorable President Herbst in regards to your inquiry as to the authority of the University of Connecticut ("UConn") to acquire or dispose of real estate.
-
You have requested a formal opinion as to whether employees of state-aided institutions, as defined in Conn. Gen. Stat. § 5-175, are authorized to participate in the Early Retirement Incentive Program (ERIP) created in 2003 by Conn. Pub. Act No. 03-02. If the answer to this question is in the affirmative, you have also inquired as to whether such employees are bound by the reemployment provisions contained in the State Employees Retirement Act, Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 5-152 to 5-192x (hereinafter SERA or the Retirement Act).
-
You have asked for a formal opinion as to whether Public Act No. 03-45, An Act Concerning Secondhand Smoke in Work Places, applies to Foxwoods and the Mohegan Sun casinos. In particular, you ask whether section 14 of the gaming compacts,1 which requires the Mashantucket Pequot and Mohegan Tribes to adopt health and safety standards that are at least as rigorous as the State's health and safety laws, requires application of the smoking ban to the Tribes' gaming facilities.
-
You have requested an opinion as to whether the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (DMHAS) is required to apply to the Office of Health Care Access (OHCA) to obtain a certificate of need authorizing the reduction or elimination of health care services provided by DMHAS.
-
You have requested our opinion as to the following question: "Given the requirements of Section 4-9d [of the General Statutes] or any applicable Statute, [may] a Commissioner [of the Departments of Motor Vehicle, Public Safety or Transportation] delegate to a member of his or her staff not appointed as a Deputy Commissioner the authority and responsibility to vote on the State Traffic Commission ['STC']?"
-
This is in response to your request for opinion on whether municipalities that have voted to allow bazaars and raffles, but that have no chief of police or first selectman to investigate applications and issue permits as required by the Bazaar and Raffle Act, nevertheless may permit qualifying organizations to conduct bazaars and raffles.
-
This is in response to your request for advice on whether Connecticut law would prohibit Autotote Enterprises, Inc. ("AEI") from continuing to purchase the New York Racing Association's ("NYRA's") signal if NYRA were indicted on criminal conspiracy to commit tax fraud charges.
-
We write to clarify our April 14, 2003 opinion concerning whether the Mashantucket Pequot Tribe (the "Tribe") could conduct Casino Night events at Foxwoods Casino ("Foxwoods") to benefit state charities. This issue had arisen in the wake of action by the Connecticut General Assembly earlier this year repealing the Games of Chance Act, which had allowed charities to run Las Vegas Nights events within the state as fundraisers, subject to the provisions of the Act. As a result of this repeal, charitable organizations may no longer legally conduct Las Vegas Night events in this State.
-
This is in response to your recent request for an opinion on whether there exists legislative authority for the Division of Special Revenue to institute a "cash" lotto in addition to the other lottery games currently conducted by, or under the authority of, the Division.
-
The issue addressed in this opinion is whether Special Revenue Investigators may carry firearms.1 Special Revenue Investigators are employed by the Division of Special Revenue (DOSR) to investigate violations of the state's legalized gambling laws. In addition, they are statutorily granted the powers of State Police to make arrests for criminal offenses2 arising from the operation or conduct of the State's off-track betting and lottery.
-
We are in receipt of a letter dated December 3, 1991, from the Commission's Administrator, John C. Ford, with an attached letter dated October 21, 1991, from Dr. Roger J. Harris. The issue on which you seek our guidance is whether the Commission must conduct an administrative hearing on the individual's application based upon the oral surgeon's letter dated October 21, 1991, which your agency interprets as a request for such a hearing.
-
By letter of February 4, 1992. you requested an opinion of the Attorney General on the State's ability to pursue statutory support obligations against the community (non-institutionalized) spouse of an institutionalized Medicaid patient, in view of certain provisions contained in the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act of 1988 (MCCA), Pub.L. 100-360.
-
This letter is in response to your request of June 2, 1992 for our opinion concerning the licensing of pharmacies which are owned by physicians.
-
This is in reply to your request for our opinion of whether the Central Connecticut State University Alumni Association, Inc. (hereinafter "the Association") is a "foundation" as defined by Conn. Gen. Stat. § 4-37e(2). Foundation status would subject the Association to the requirements of Chapter 47 of the General Statutes (Conn. Gen. Stat. §§4-37e - 4-37i), including possibly full audits by the State Auditors.
-
In your letter of November 25, 1991, you request our guidance concerning the issue of personal liability of state officials in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Hafer v. Melo, 112 S.Ct. 358 (1991). To better respond to the issues posed in your letter, we have framed your inquiry as follows: 1. How does the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Hafer v. Melo affect a state official's exposure to personal liability pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for acts performed as part of his official duties? 2. Under what circumstances will the state provide for the defense as well as indemnification of a state official when sued personally pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for acts taken in the course of the performance of his official duties?