Conn. Gen. Stat. § 4-178
This is the official text of Conn. Gen. Stat. § 4-178, part of Connecticut’s Gen. Stat — part of the compiled statutory law of Connecticut, published by the state as "Gen. Stat." Browse the sections below, each linked to its official government source.
Not legal advice. This page reproduces the official text of a government statute for reference only. Laws change, and how a statute applies depends on your specific facts. For advice about your situation, consult a licensed attorney in your state.
Sec. 4-178. Contested cases. Evidence.
Official statutory text
Evidence concerning charges not included in notice to teacher re hearing under Sec. 10-151(b) is irrelevant. 167 C. 368. Having decided to proceed without counsel, plaintiff cannot claim he was prejudiced by admission of evidence to which he did not object. 168 C. 94. Cited. Id., 435; 170 C. 141; 171 C. 691; Id., 705; 172 C. 263; 173 C. 462; 177 C. 78; Id., 344; 183 C. 128; 186 C. 153; 191 C. 173; 211 C. 508; 215 C. 474; Id., 616; 216 C. 627; 218 C. 256; 220 C. 86; 223 C. 618; 226 C. 105; 228 C. 651; 231 C. 602; 237 C. 209; 239 C. 32.
Cited. 1 CA 1; 4 CA 307; Id., 359; 9 CA 622; 10 CA 90; 22 CA 181, 189; Id., 193; 24 CA 662; judgment reversed, see 223 C. 618; 27 CA 346; 33 CA 727; 34 CA 123; 37 CA 653; judgment reversed, see 238 C. 361. Subdiv. (8): Although parties are entitled to notice of any nonrecord facts that will constitute proof in a case, the composition of an administrative board, as well as statute, put plaintiff on notice that the board would use its own expertise when determining whether plaintiff's alleged acts conformed to the standard of care. 60 CA 775. Subdiv. (1): Evidence of how department treated other waste facilities, in the absence of a claim for selective enforcement, was properly excluded as it had no logical tendency to aid the trier in determination of the issues of whether plaintiff misrepresented and omitted pertinent facts to department and failed to comply with requirements of the general permit. 179 CA 127.
Subdiv. (4): Notice requirements are to protect parties from surprising and unexpected material or evidence; previous findings of Insurance Commissioner in same matter not prejudicial. 32 CS 257. Cited. 34 CS 225; 36 CS 18; 39 CS 99; Id., 462; 42 CS 1; Id., 413; Id., 602; 44 CS 21. Subdiv. (1): Hearsay evidence may be admitted as long as it is reliable and probative. 47 CS 228.
Cited. 1 CA 1; 4 CA 307; Id., 359; 9 CA 622; 10 CA 90; 22 CA 181, 189; Id., 193; 24 CA 662; judgment reversed, see 223 C. 618; 27 CA 346; 33 CA 727; 34 CA 123; 37 CA 653; judgment reversed, see 238 C. 361. Subdiv. (8): Although parties are entitled to notice of any nonrecord facts that will constitute proof in a case, the composition of an administrative board, as well as statute, put plaintiff on notice that the board would use its own expertise when determining whether plaintiff's alleged acts conformed to the standard of care. 60 CA 775. Subdiv. (1): Evidence of how department treated other waste facilities, in the absence of a claim for selective enforcement, was properly excluded as it had no logical tendency to aid the trier in determination of the issues of whether plaintiff misrepresented and omitted pertinent facts to department and failed to comply with requirements of the general permit. 179 CA 127.
Subdiv. (4): Notice requirements are to protect parties from surprising and unexpected material or evidence; previous findings of Insurance Commissioner in same matter not prejudicial. 32 CS 257. Cited. 34 CS 225; 36 CS 18; 39 CS 99; Id., 462; 42 CS 1; Id., 413; Id., 602; 44 CS 21. Subdiv. (1): Hearsay evidence may be admitted as long as it is reliable and probative. 47 CS 228.
Status: in_force · Read it on the official government site
Need a lawyer in Connecticut?
Find a Connecticut lawyer
About this page: Statute text is reproduced from official government publishers via the
Open US Law dataset
(Vaquill AI, snapshot v2026.08, CC BY 4.0). Primary legislative text like this is public domain under the government-edicts doctrine
(Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). We link every section back to its official source so you can verify it independently.