Sec. 17b-61. (Formerly Sec. 17-2b). Decision. Appeal. Extension of time limit for filing appeal. - Connecticut Statutes

      Sec. 17b-61. (Formerly Sec. 17-2b). Decision. Appeal. Extension of time limit for filing appeal. (a) Not later than sixty days after such hearing, or three business days if the hearing concerns a denial of or failure to provide emergency housing, the commissioner or his designated hearing officer shall render a final decision based upon all the evidence introduced before him and applying all pertinent provisions of law, regulations and departmental policy, and such final decision shall supersede the decision made without a hearing, provided final definitive administrative action shall be taken by the commissioner or his designee within ninety days after the request of such hearing pursuant to section 17b-60. Notice of such final decision shall be given to the aggrieved person by mailing him a copy thereof within one business day of its rendition. Such decision after hearing shall be final except as provided in subsections (b) and (c) of this section.

      (b) The applicant for such hearing, if aggrieved, may appeal therefrom in accordance with section 4-183. Appeals from decisions of said commissioner shall be privileged cases to be heard by the court as soon after the return day as shall be practicable.

      (c) The commissioner may, for good cause shown by an aggrieved person, extend the time for filing an appeal to Superior Court beyond the time limitations of section 4-183, as set forth below:

      (1) Any aggrieved person who is authorized to appeal a decision of the commissioner, pursuant to subsection (b) of this section, but who fails to serve or file a timely appeal to the Superior Court pursuant to section 4-183, may, as provided in this subsection, petition that the commissioner, for good cause shown, extend the time for filing any such appeal. Such a petition must be filed with the commissioner in writing and contain a complete and detailed explanation of the reasons that precluded the petitioner from serving or filing an appeal within the statutory time period. Such petition must also be accompanied by all available documentary evidence that supports or corroborates the reasons advanced for the extension request. In no event shall a petition for extension be considered or approved if filed later than ninety days after the rendition of the final decision. The decision as to whether to grant an extension shall be made consistent with the provisions of subdivision (2) of this subsection and shall be final and not subject to judicial review.

      (2) In determining whether to grant a good cause extension, as provided for in this subsection, the commissioner, or his authorized designee, shall, without the necessity of further hearing, review and, as necessary, verify the reasons advanced by the petition in justification of the extension request. A determination that good cause prevented the filing of a timely appeal shall be issued in writing and shall enable the petitioner to serve and file an appeal within the time provisions of section 4-183, from the date of the decision granting an extension. The circumstances that precluded the petitioner from filing a timely appeal, and which may be deemed good cause for purposes of granting an extension petition, include, but are not limited to: (A) Serious illness or incapacity of the petitioner which has been documented as materially affecting the conduct of personal affairs; (B) a death or serious illness in the petitioner's immediate family that has been documented as precluding the petitioner from perfecting a timely appeal; (C) incorrect or misleading information given to the petitioner by the agency, relating to the appeal time period, and shown to have been materially relied on by the petitioner as the basis for failure to file a timely appeal; (D) evidence that the petitioner did not receive notice of the agency decision; and (E) other unforeseen and unavoidable circumstances of an exceptional nature which prevented the filing of a timely appeal.

      (1959, P.A. 96, S. 2, 3; 1963, P.A. 73, S. 1; P.A. 74-183, S. 209, 291; P.A. 75-420, S. 4, 6; P.A. 76-162; 76-436, S. 179, 681; P.A. 77-452, S. 52, 72; 77-603, S. 67, 125; P.A. 78-280, S. 25, 127; P.A. 87-473, S. 4.)

      History: 1963 act changed jurisdiction from common pleas to circuit court; P.A. 74-183 replaced circuit court with court of common pleas and included reference to judicial districts; P.A. 75-420 replaced welfare commissioner with commissioner of social services; P.A. 76-162 required decision within 60 rather than 30 days of hearing and required "final definitive administrative action" within 90 days of hearing request; P.A. 76-436 replaced court of common pleas with superior court, effective July 1, 1978; P.A. 77-452 repeated change in courts and, with P.A. 77-603, replaced previous detailed appeal provisions in Subsec. (b) with statement that appeals be made in accordance with Sec. 4-183; P.A. 78-280 removed Subsec. indicators and deleted provisions formerly in Subsec. (a) re appeals; P.A. 87-473 amended Subsec. (a) to require a final decision not later than 3 business days after the hearing if the hearing concerns a denial of or failure to provide emergency housing and changed the time limit for notice of the final decision from 72 hours to 1 business day and added Subsec. (c); Sec. 17-2b transferred to Sec. 17b-61 in 1995.

      Annotations to former section 17-2b:

      Where objection was made to constitutionality of section 17-90 on the basis of violation of due process of law, held that hearing procedure set forth in this section and section 17-2a satisfies the requirement of due process. 152 C. 56, 57. Cited. 165 C. 490. Cited. 168 C. 336. Cited. 172 C. 292. Plaintiffs, who were denied AFDC benefits while residents of Connecticut and who appealed the denial while still residents, were "aggrieved" parties, and thus could maintain the appeal notwithstanding their subsequent removal from Connecticut. 174 C. 8. Cited. 177 C. 599. Cited. 189 C. 29. Cited. 191 C. 384. Cited. 214 C. 601. Cited. 229 C. 664. Cited. 233 C. 370.

      Cited. 44 CA 143.

      Cited. 30 CS 587. Cited. 31 CS 515. A classification of obligations recognized in regulations concerning disposition of assets by welfare claimants is not a violation of equal protection provisions of United States Constitution as to those not recognized. Id., 547. Conclusions drawn from the facts proved must not be the result of speculation and conjecture. Does not permit reliance on hearsay when better evidence is readily available. 32 CS 560. Substantial and competent evidence requirement means such evidence that has rational probative force. Id., 564. Cited. Id., 603; Id., 605. Failure to make a finding of facts from the evidence introduced at the hearing constitutes an abuse of discretion. Id., 606. Cited. 33 CS 769. Cited. 34 CS 265; Id., 586. Cited. 40 CS 554.

      In an appeal taken under this section the basic issue before the court is whether the commissioner has acted illegally or so arbitrarily and unreasonably as to abuse his discretion. 3 Conn. Cir. Ct. 271. Cited. Id., 504, 505. Cited. 4 Conn. Cir. Ct. 67; Id., 85; Id., 138; Id., 338, 339; Id., 450, 647. Cited. 5 Conn. Cir. Ct. 294. On appeal from commissioner's hearing court cannot substitute its judgment for that of commissioner. It can only decide whether action of agency was illegal, arbitrary or an abuse of discretion. Id., 505. Cited. 6 Conn. Cir. Ct. 353; Id., 687.

      Subsec. (b):

      Cited. 222 C. 69.

      Annotation to present section:

      Cited. 44 CA 143.