Search Results

Page 174 of 217

• Bruce H. Cagenello, Connecticut Real Estate Commission, 1999-007 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

  The Connecticut Real Estate Commission has requested the Attorney General's Office to render a formal legal opinion regarding the interpretation of C.G.S. § 20-317(a) as it relates to the following question: Does a non-resident real estate broker or real estate salesperson who is currently licensed in Connecticut under a bona fide Reciprocal Agreement need to qualify with course and experience and take a written exam to establish competency when such licensee becomes a resident of the State of Connecticut?

• Thomas Rotunda, Executive Director, Division of Special Revenue, 1999-014 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

  You ask us whether the Division of Special Revenue (DOSR) may approve a contract between Autotote Enterprises, Inc., the licensee of the Connecticut Off-Track Betting System, and Wyvern International, Ltd., which would provide for simulcasting and common pool wagering on thoroughbred races in Australia pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-571(a).

• The Honorable Robert Leuba, Supreme Court Building, 1999-005 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

  This opinion responds to your office's request for opinion concerning the proper application of Public Act 95-175 ("the Act") to operations in the Office of Victim Services

• Honorable David B. Pudlin, Legislative Office Building, 2002-006 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

  This will acknowledge and reply to your request of November 28, 2001 for an advisory opinion as to whether the State has the authority to consolidate workforce development regions pursuant to the federal Workforce Investment Act and, if so, what criteria must be satisfied before such consolidation is approved. You also ask whether a workforce development board which has demonstrated adequate fiscal capability and achieved satisfactory performance results can be forced to change its current service area or method of operation.

• Honorable Jerry Farrell, Jr., Commissioner of Department of Consumer Protection, Formal Opinion 2009-004, Attorney General State of Connecticut

  You have asked for our opinion whether a gasoline retailer who offers a discount for cash paying customers must affirmatively disclose to consumers when such a cash discount does not apply to debit card purchases of gasoline

• Honorable Nancy Wyman, Comptroller, Formal Opinion 2009-008, Attorney General State of Connecticut

  This letter responds to your request for a formal legal opinion as to whether Article Fourth, § 16, of the Connecticut constitution permits a Governor to veto individual line items in an appropriations bill

• Martin K. Libbin, Deputy Director, Legal Services, Formal Opinion 2009-012, Attorney General State of Connecticut

  This letter is in response to your request for a formal legal opinion clarifying the Judicial Branch’s duty to disclose juvenile delinquency and youthful offender records

• Herbert J. Shepardson, Chair, State Marshal Commission, Formal Opinion 2009-010, Attorney General State of Connecticut

  You have requested my opinion on whether municipalities may, by town ordinance, dictate the terms under which they will pay for State Marshal work

• Hon. Donald Williams, Jr., Senate President Pro Tempore, Hon. Martin Looney, Senate Majority Leader, Hon. Christopher Donovan, Speaker of the House, Hon. Denise Merrill, House Majority Leader, Formal Opinion 2009-011, Attorney General State of Connecticut

  This letter responds to your request for a formal legal opinion as to whether the state-owned High Meadows health care facility in Hamden

• Honorable Donald Williams Senate President Pro Tempore, Formal Opinion 2009-007, Attorney General State of Connecticut

  You asked for a legal opinion as to the circumstances under which subsection (b) of section 3 of Public Act 09-214 would require the legislative Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee and the Appropriations Committee (the Committees) to prepare and vote on adjusted appropriations

• Honorable Kevin P. Johnston, Honorable Robert G. Jaekle, Auditors of Public Accounts, Formal Opinion 2009-002, Attorney General State of Connecticut

  You have asked for our opinion whether the State Employees Retirement Commission may use retirement fund assets for the purpose of paying overtime to employees

• Jeanne Milstein, Child Advocate, Office of the Child Advocate, Formal Opinion 2009-003, Attorney General State of Connecticut

  You have requested an opinion concerning the operation of the Family Support Council (the “Council”). Specifically, you have asked whether the Council’s enabling statute, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 17a-219c, prohibits you from delegating your voting authority to a member of your staff

• Ms. Carol Carson, Executive Director, Office of State Ethics, Formal Opinion 2009-006, Attorney General State of Connecticut

  The Bridgeport Roman Catholic Diocesan Corporation (“the Church”) has filed a federal lawsuit against officials of the Office of State Ethics (“OSE”) seeking court orders preventing the OSE from seeking to enforce against the Church certain state laws governing lobbyists

• Honorable Emil H. Frankel, Department of Transportation, 1991-026 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

  This is in response to your letter of July 22, 1991, in which you seek our opinion on whether the Department of Transportation ("DOT") has the authority to cancel the unexpended balance of purchase orders that the DOT has issued to Hartford Paving Inc. ("Hartford Paving") for bridge painting services under Contract Award No. 89--A-13-1054-C. You further ask whether the DOT can avoid contracting with Hartford Paving on future painting projects and instead use other companies listed in the contract award.

• Honorable Audrey Rowe , Department of Income Maintenance , 1993-016 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

  By your letter of May 4, 1992, you requested our opinion on several questions about the exclusion of irrevocable funeral accounts from consideration as assets in determining eligibility for your Department's programs. Essentially, you asked whether the monetary limit Conn. Gen. Stat. §42-207 places on such accounts is a requirement for their validity. If it is, you asked whether the limit may be exceeded either by creating an account outside the state and then transferring it to the state or by creating multiple irrevocable accounts whose total amount exceed the limit.