The Office of the Attorney General William Tong
Formal Opinions
Page 15 of 42
-
This letter responds to your request for an opinion dated January 31, 1997. Briefly stated, your letter relates that since 1993 the Division's regulations have provided: "A prize to which a purchaser may become entitled shall not be assignable." Conn. Stat. Regs.
-
This is in response to your request for an opinion regarding the settlement of an employment dispute with Marc Schillinger, a former state employee. Specifically, you inquire "whether the Governor, upon the recommendation of the Attorney General, has the authority under Section 3-7(c) [of the General Statutes] to compromise a claim in a manner which is not in accordance with Section 5-162 and 5-155a of the General Statutes."
-
You have asked whether the University of Connecticut possesses the legal authority to pay directly vendors of UConn 2000 projects. You noted that if the bond proceeds had as their source a State bond issue, the University could not make such direct payments.
-
The Auditors of Public Accounts have notified this Office of what they consider to be an irregularity in the delegation of purchasing authority from the Department of Information Technology ("DOIT") to the Department of Social Services ("DSS") in connection with the selection of a contractor to administer and develop a management information system for DSS’s consolidated Child Care Assistance Program. Specifically, the Auditors express the opinion that the delegation of authority in question, if permitted under the Connecticut General Statutes, should have been made in writing, rather than given verbally, as appears to have been the case. The Auditors have asked whether this Office agrees with their position and, if so, they have suggested that we inform you.
-
You have requested a formal opinion of the Attorney General as to "whether a former Deputy Sheriff, former High Sheriff or a State Marshal who resigns from his appointment may continue to collect wage executions they had served while acting in their official capacities."
-
As Chairman of the State Marshal Commission you have requested a formal Opinion of the Attorney General as to the following four questions: 1. While the State Marshal Commission has duly appointed all state marshals, none has been “sworn.” Must state marshals be "sworn"? If so, what oath is to be administered and who may administer it? 2. Does a state marshal have "police" or law enforcement powers? If so, what is the scope of such powers? 3. State marshals are referred to in the General Statutes as "peace officers." What powers are conferred upon "peace officers"? Are these the only "police" or law enforcement powers that state marshals possess? 4. Do you have any suggested modifications to the above certificate language?
-
You have requested our advice regarding your obligations under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 4-61dd, known as the "whistleblower" statute. You have explained that, in the course of reviewing a whistleblower complaint, you have obtained access to client records from the Office of Protection and Advocacy.
-
This letter is in response to your request for a formal legal opinion regarding the authority of the Chief Court Administrator, the Honorable Joseph Pellegrino, to eliminate the Connecticut Superior Court’s Geographical Area 16 ("G.A. 16") by closing the G.A. 16 courthouse in West Hartford and expanding the boundaries of G.A. 14 to incorporate all of the towns that are currently in G.A. 16.
-
In your June 26, 2001 letter you request our opinion as to whether P.A. 01-141, §4 authorizes the Board of Trustees for the Connecticut State University System (CSUS) to establish, subject to authorization by the Board of Governors of Higher Education, a pilot education doctoral program to be conducted at one of its institutions only or whether such a doctoral program may be conducted at more than one of its institutions.
-
You have inquired whether the provisions of Special Act No. 01-7 (S.A. 01-7), and in particular Section 5 of the Special Act, empower the Hartford School Building Committee, created by the Special Act, to hire a school construction or program manager of its choosing, without having to comply with the strictures and mandates of the Hartford City Charter and various municipal ordinances or regulations addressing the purchase of goods and professional services by the city.
-
You requested an opinion regarding the scope of our Supreme Court’s decision in American Promotional Events, Inc., v. Blumenthal, 285 Conn. 192 (2008)
-
It is the opinion of this office that the Department has the authority to obtain, without customer consent, customer identifying information from retail food establishments in connection with a foodborne illness outbreak.
-
You ask whether an individual who is an officer or employee of a tenant of the Hartford Regional Market may serve as a "public member" of the Authority's board of directors
-
Your department has asked whether the state is responsible for paying increases to the minimum wage when state contracts are silent as to which party will absorb the cost associated with such increases
-
The property in question, comprised of 14.49 acres together with the improvements thereon, including the Theatre building and a two story house that had long been utilized as office space