Connecticut § 52-180b Presumption against admission of evidence of prior criminal conviction of applicant or employee.

Connecticut Statutes

§ 52-180b — Presumption against admission of evidence of prior criminal conviction of applicant or employee.

Connecticut § 52-180b

Title 52Civil Actions

Ch. 899Evidence

This text of Connecticut § 52-180b (Presumption against admission of evidence of prior criminal conviction of applicant or employee.) 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. § 52-180b (2026).

Text

There shall be a rebuttable presumption against admission of evidence of the prior criminal conviction of an applicant or employee in an action alleging that an employer has been negligent in hiring an applicant or retaining an employee, or in supervising the employer's agent, representative or designee with respect to hiring an applicant or retaining an employee, if the applicant or employee held a valid provisional pardon or certificate of rehabilitation at the time such alleged negligence occurred and a party establishes, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the employer knew that the applicant or employee held a valid provisional pardon or certificate of rehabilitation at the time such alleged negligence occurred. For the purposes of this section, “employer” has the same meaning as

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

There shall be a rebuttable presumption against admission of evidence of the prior criminal conviction of an applicant or employee in an action alleging that an employer has been negligent in hiring an applicant or retaining an employee, or in supervising the employer's agent, representative or designee with respect to hiring an applicant or retaining an employee, if the applicant or employee held a valid provisional pardon or certificate of rehabilitation at the time such alleged negligence occurred and a party establishes, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the employer knew that the applicant or employee held a valid provisional pardon or certificate of rehabilitation at the time such alleged negligence occurred. For the purposes of this section, “employer” has the same meaning as provided in section 46a-80a.