Connecticut Statutes
§ 52-572o — Comparative responsibility. Award of damages. Action for contribution.
Connecticut § 52-572o
This text of Connecticut § 52-572o (Comparative responsibility. Award of damages. Action for contribution.) 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. § 52-572o (2026).
Text
(a)In any claim under sections 52-240a, 52-240b, 52-572m to 52-572q, inclusive, or 52-577a, the comparative responsibility of, or attributed to, the claimant, shall not bar recovery but shall diminish the award of compensatory damages proportionately, according to the measure of responsibility attributed to the claimant.
(b)In any claim involving comparative responsibility, the court may instruct the jury to give answers to special interrogatories, or if there is no jury, the court may make its own findings, indicating (1) the amount of damages each claimant would receive if comparative responsibility were disregarded, and (2) the percentage of responsibility allocated to each party, including the claimant, as compared with the combined responsibility of all parties to the action. For th
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Lamontagne v. EI Du Pont De Nemours and Co.
834 F. Supp. 576 (D. Connecticut, 1993)
Nicholson v. United Technologies Corp.
697 F. Supp. 598 (D. Connecticut, 1988)
Savona v. General Motors Corp.
640 F. Supp. 6 (D. Connecticut, 1985)
Stefano v. Smith
705 F. Supp. 733 (D. Connecticut, 1989)
Terry v. Palace Aids, Inc., No. Cv 99 0078989s (Jun. 20, 2001)
2001 Conn. Super. Ct. 8027 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2001)
Van Epps v. Waterbury Donuts, Inc., No. Cv 0144459 (May 4, 1999)
1999 Conn. Super. Ct. 6543 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1999)
Strohecker v. Canadian Pacific, No. X01 Cv 95 0125123 (Jun. 8, 1999)
1999 Conn. Super. Ct. 6912 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1999)
Pereira v. Darien Rental Service, No. Cv93 30 65 20 S (Feb. 1, 1995)
1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 1180-G (Connecticut Superior Court, 1995)
Travelers Property Casualty v. Chirico, No. Cv98-0077815s (Aug. 18, 2000)
2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 10289 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2000)
Carlson v. CBS Corporation
(D. Connecticut, 2020)
Roma v. Daisy Manufacturing Co.
775 F. Supp. 41 (D. Connecticut, 1991)
Legislative History
(P.A. 79-483, S. 4; P.A. 82-160, S. 244; P.A. 84-546, S. 122, 173.) History: P.A. 82-160 amended Subsec. (a) by deleting incorrect statutory references; P.A. 84-546 deleted reference to Sec. 38-370o in Subsec. (a); (Revisor's note: The reference in Subsec. (a) to Secs. “52-572n to 52-572r” was changed editorially by the Revisors to Secs. “52-572n to 52-572q” to reflect the repeal of Sec. 52-572r by P.A. 93-228, S. 34, 35). Cited. 187 C. 363; 192 C. 280; 200 C. 562; 203 C. 156; 204 C. 399. Sec. 52-572m et seq., product liability act, abrogated common law indemnification principles in this area. 205 C. 694. Cited. Id., 699; 207 C. 575; Id., 599; 208 C. 82; 210 C. 189; 212 C. 462; Id., 509; 213 C. 136; 216 C. 65; 225 C. 401; 226 C. 282; 229 C. 213; Id., 500; Id., 829; 233 C. 732; 236 C. 769; 241 C. 199; 243 C. 168. Section does not contemplate, and is inconsistent with, apportionment of a percentage of plaintiff's total damages to his employer who has intervened in the action to recoup worker's compensation payments made by employer; other than provision in Subsec. (c) requiring fact finder to consider both the nature and quality of the conduct of each party, section does not limit the type of conduct that may be considered in determining plaintiff's measure of comparative responsibility. 280 C. 1. Modified consumer expectation test, recognized in 241 C. 199, is the primary strict product liability test; ordinary consumer expectation test is reserved for those limited cases in which product fails to meet consumer's legitimate, commonly accepted minimum safety expectations. 321 C. 172. Cited. 1 CA 48; 3 CA 230; 8 CA 642; 16 CA 558; 30 CA 664; 31 CA 824; 32 CA 373; judgment reversed, see 229 C. 829; 36 CA 601; 39 CA 635; 40 CS 74; 41 CA 555; Id., 856; 46 CA 18; Id., 699. Cited. 40 CS 120; 41 CS 179; 42 CS 153; 44 CS 510. Legislature, in enacting section, abrogated claims for common-law indemnification. 49 CS 394. Subsec. (d): Purposes of this Subsec. and Subsec. (e) are to ensure, to the extent possible, that plaintiff is made whole by recovering the full amount of his net award, from all or any one of the defendants, and to provide that if any liable defendant pays more than its proportional share of that net award, it may seek appropriate contributions from the other liable defendants; employer who has intervened in the case to recoup workers' compensation benefits paid to plaintiff is not a party against which proportional liability may be assigned under section. 280 C. 1.
Nearby Sections
15
§ 52-109
Substituted plaintiff.Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
Connecticut § 52-572o, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/statute/ct/52-572o.