Connecticut Statutes
§ 42-110c — Exceptions.
Connecticut § 42-110c
JurisdictionConnecticut
Title 42Business, Selling, Trading and Collection Practices
Ch. 735aUnfair Trade Practices
This text of Connecticut § 42-110c (Exceptions.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42-110c (2026).
Text
(a)Nothing in this chapter shall apply to:
(1)Transactions or actions otherwise permitted under law as administered by any regulatory board or officer acting under statutory authority of the state or of the United States; or (2) acts done by the publisher, owner, agent or employee of a newspaper, periodical or radio or television station in the publication or dissemination of an advertisement, where the publisher, owner, agent or employee did not have knowledge of the false, misleading, unfair or deceptive character of the advertisement, and did not have direct financial interest in the sale or distribution of the advertised product or service.
(b)The burden of proving exemption, as provided in this section, from the provisions of this chapter shall be upon the person claiming the exemp
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Garcia v. Fry
186 F. Supp. 3d 228 (D. Connecticut, 2016)
Eylward v. Bank of Boston Connecticut, No. Cv91-0237453 (Aug. 6, 1991)
1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 7265 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1991)
People's Bank v. Mandel, No. Cv92 29 08 31 (Oct. 13, 1992)
1992 Conn. Super. Ct. 9400 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1992)
Lafayette Bank Trust Co. v. Jarvis, No. Cv90 0272005 (Sep. 27, 1991)
1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 7802 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1991)
Leydon v. Town of Greenwich, No. Cv95 0143373 S (Dec. 1, 1995)
1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 13434 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1995)
City of Danbury v. Philbury, Inc., No. Cv 94 0316860 (Jan. 28, 1997)
1997 Conn. Super. Ct. 197-F (Connecticut Superior Court, 1997)
Carpenter v. Housing Authority, No. Cv 96-0472650s (Jul. 16, 1996)
1996 Conn. Super. Ct. 5149-WWWW (Connecticut Superior Court, 1996)
Sterling v. Securus Technologies, Inc.
(D. Connecticut, 2019)
Legislative History
(P.A. 73-615, S. 3, 16; P.A. 75-618, S. 2, 11; P.A. 76-303, S. 2, 4.) History: P.A. 75-618 referred to “unfair” character of advertisement in Subsec. (a); P.A. 76-303 specified transactions or actions otherwise permitted “under law”. Cited. 186 C. 507; 190 C. 510; 192 C. 558; 200 C. 172. Municipal housing authority is exempt from liability under CUTPA. 213 C. 354. Cited. 230 C. 486. Municipality is exempt from liability under CUTPA when acting pursuant to a pervasive statutory scheme. 249 C. 1. Cited. 42 CA 599. Town may not be sued under CUTPA for allegedly overcharging for building permit fees because CUTPA does not apply to the system of issuing building permits and collecting fees which is authorized and regulated by state statute and regulation. 142 CA 326. Cited. 40 CS 336; 45 CS 11. Subsec. (a): Cited. 199 C. 651. Subdiv. (1): CUTPA is subject to the remoteness doctrine as a limitation on standing, and complaint brought re increased power generation at nuclear power station failed to allege direct harm. 300 C. 542.
Nearby Sections
15
§ 42-103aaa
Books and records.§ 42-103b
Definitions.§ 42-103cc
Short title: Time Share Act.§ 42-103ccc
Time share resale disclosure requirements.§ 42-103dd
Definitions.§ 42-103e
Contents of listing.Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
Connecticut § 42-110c, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/statute/ct/42-110c.