Section 4-183
- Citation
- Section 4-183
- Parent Document
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Jurisdiction
- Connecticut (state)
- Effective Date
- 1999-07-20
Other Sections in This Document (52)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Bittle v. Commissioner of Social Services, 249 Conn. 503 (1999)
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
- Section 4-183
Full Text
2,037 charsThere is an apparent conflict between subsections (c) and (d) of § 4-183 with respect to the legal consequences associated with the failure of an appellant to serve the agency. Section 4-183 (c) provides that “failure to make . . . service within forty-five days on parties other than the agency that rendered the final decision shall not deprive the court of jurisdiction over the appeal. . . .” The law revision commission in elaborating on the application of subsection (c) of § 4-183 stated: “Failure to serve parties other than the agency that rendered the final decision within the forty-five days is not a jurisdictional defect. Such failure to serve does, however, subject the appeal to dismissal on a showing of prejudice.” Conn. Joint Standing Committee Hearings, Judiciary, Pt. 2,1988 Sess., p. 385; see also Conn. Joint Standing Committee Hearings, Judiciary, Pt. 1, 1988 Sess., p. 264, remarks of Steve Frazzini, executive director of the Hartford County Legal Aid Society (“[T]he number of cases where appeals have been dismissed because some supposedly vital party, not the agency, but someone else [was] not served are also far too frequent. What this bill says is that if you serve the agency on time, then the authority to serve anybody else who’s concerned at the time isn’t critical as long as you do serve them and as long as that parly isn’t prejudiced by your serving them late.”). Section 4-183 (d) provides, however, that “[i]f the failure to make service causes prejudice to any party to the appeal or to the agency, the court, after hearing, may dismiss the appeal.” (Emphasis added.) In Tolly v. Dept. of Human Resources, supra, 225 Conn. 28-29, we resolved this apparent conflict, and harmonized the two subsections of § 4-183 by concluding that a complete failure to serve the agency is the kind of defect in the service that deprives the court of subject matter jurisdiction; whereas, a defect in the papers effecting service makes the appeal subject to dismissal upon a showing of prejudice to the agency.