The Office of the Attorney General William Tong
Formal Opinions
Page 15 of 42
-
This is in response to your recent request for an opinion on whether the Division of Special Revenue must conduct a hearing, under the provisions of the Uniform Administrative Procedure Act (UAPA), prior to revoking a lottery agent's license1 for failure to meet pre-established minimum sales levels for on-line and instant lottery ticket sales.2 Specifically, you inquire as to whether a lottery license is a "license" as that term is contemplated by the UAPA. We also understand that a question is raised as to the practical need for a hearing inasmuch as evidence of sales levels is documented and, presumably, incontestable.
-
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?
-
This is in response to your request for a formal opinion regarding the question whether municipalities of this state may utilize the services of an independent contractor, such as a collection agency, to aid municipal officials in collecting delinquent taxes.
-
By memo dated January 27, 1992 you requested an opinion from this office on whether state law can be construed to allow the Governor the option to not implement ("trigger off") an otherwise operable extended unemployment compensation benefit program (EB) should unemployment continue to rise to a certain level in this state. The purpose of this option is to allow the state's unemployed to be subject solely to a federally-funded emergency unemployment compensation (EUC) program. You also ask, assuming such a construction is allowable, whether the Governor may delegate the authority to "trigger off" state EB, as well as the authority to make all necessary contractual arrangements with the U.S. Department of Labor for administration of the EUC program, to the Administrator of the Unemployment Compensation Act pursuant to Conn.Gen.Stat. Section 31-250.
-
You have requested my opinion on whether municipalities may, by town ordinance, dictate the terms under which they will pay for State Marshal work
-
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
-
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
-
This letter responds to your request for a formal legal opinion as to whether the state-owned High Meadows health care facility in Hamden
-
You have asked our opinion on several questions concerning State Marshals
-
You have requested a formal legal opinion regarding the allocation of costs associated with resident state troopers detailed, pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 29-5, to towns lacking an organized police force
-
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
-
Your department requested my opinion on whether an individual or business that sells animals at an exposition event or other temporary location
-
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
-
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