Statutory Responsibility
The Attorney General is the chief legal
officer of the state. The Attorney
General's Office serves as legal counsel to all
state
agencies. The Connecticut Constitution
and Connecticut statutes authorize the Attorney General to represent the people
of the State of
Connecticut to protect the public interest.
Revenue
Achieved by the Office of the Attorney General
During the 2002-2003 fiscal year,
A. Revenue Generated for General Fund
Tobacco
Settlement Fund Collections $ 134,686,539
State Child
Support Collections 46,300,000
Tax
Collection 19,236,430
Health Care
Fraud Recovery 2,536,000
Penalties for
Environmental Violations 4,126,731
Antitrust/Consumer
Protection 2,378,147
Department of
Social Services 1,501,095
Department of
Administrative Services 5,438,365
Miscellaneous
Collections
1,877,229
Total Revenue
for State's General Fund $ 218,080,536
B.
Revenue Generated for Special Funds
John Dempsey
Hospital $ 162,333
Second Injury
Fund 497,070
Antitrust
restitution
Workers’ Comp
re State Employees 491,270
Unpaid Wage and
Unemployment Tax 657,494
Total Revenue
Generated for Special Funds $ 1,808,167
C. Revenue Awarded or Paid to Consumers
Antitrust/Consumer
Restitution $
5,068,571
Environmental
Remediation 1,107,717
Charitable
Trusts & Funds Recovered or
Preserved for Charitable Purposes 25,640,308
Restitution from
Household Finance 6,296,060
Health
Insurance Advocacy
2,339,777
Total Revenue
Generated for Consumers
$40,452,433
TOTAL
REVENUE ACHIEVED $260,341,136
Public Service
The Office of the Attorney General is
divided into 14 departments, each designated to represent agencies which
provide particular categories of service to State residents. The Attorney General also participates in
the legislative process, maintains an active communication with citizens and
investigates, in conjunction with the State Auditors, Whistleblower
complaints. During fiscal year
2002-2003 the office generated in excess of $260 million in revenue for the general
fund, special state funds and for consumers.
The overall work completed by this office in fiscal year 2002-2003 is
summarized as follows:
Court cases
completed 21,913
Court cases
pending 22,856
Legal documents
examined 7,915
Administrative
proceedings 3,712
Appeals
completed
98
Appeals
pending
194
Formal opinions
issued 27
Legislation
The Attorney General successfully
advocated for legislation that prohibits smoking in most restaurants, bars and
places of employment, extends the moratorium on projects that cross Long Island
Sound, closes a loophole in the law requiring registration of sex offenders,
requires mandatory drunk driving tests for those drivers involved in an
accident resulting in a fatality or serious injury and prohibits young drivers
from having more than one minor in their car for the first six months after
obtaining a driver’s license. The
Attorney General also continued to fight for lower prescription drug prices,
consumer protection from disclosure of personal financial information and tougher
child support laws.
Anti-Trust
This Department administers and enforces
the Connecticut Antitrust Act, and has authority to enforce major provisions of
the federal antitrust laws. Utilizing
these statutes, we prosecute antitrust actions on behalf of consumers,
businesses and governmental units.
The Attorney General has been very
involved in attempting to reduce the cost of prescription drugs and filed a
lawsuit against Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Andrx Corporation for
conspiring to keep a generic version of the heart medication Cardizem CD off
the market. Under the settlement,
Aventis and Andrx will pay $80 million into a fund that will compensate
consumers, state agencies and insurance companies that overpaid for Cardizem CD
and its generic equivalent between 1998 and 2003. A $55 million settlement was also reached with Bristol-Myers
Squibb, resolving an antitrust lawsuit regarding the drug Taxol®, an
anti-cancer drug used in the treatment of ovarian, breast and other forms of
cancer. The lawsuit claimed that Bristol-Myers
Squibb excluded generic competition by securing patents through fraud and also
by filing baseless lawsuits against generic manufacturers to keep generic forms
of Taxol® off the market. The
settlement will prevent Bristol-Myers Squibb from engaging in anti-competitive
conduct in the future. The Antitrust
Department is also part of a nationwide effort to contact consumers who took
the anti-anxiety medication BuSpar® or a generic version during the last eight
years. This undertaking is the result of
an antitrust settlement reached with Bristol-Myers Squibb and two other
pharmaceutical companies. The $100
million dollar settlement and accompanying claims program will help reimburse
consumers and state agencies that were forced to pay inflated drug prices due
to Bristol-Myers Squibb’s having misused patents to maintain drug monopolies.
An antitrust lawsuit filed by the
Department alleging that five music distributors (Sony, Universal, BMG, EMI,
and Warner Elecktra-Atlantic) and three large music retailers had entered into
illegal conspiracies to raise the price of prerecorded music to consumers and
reduce competition among music CD retailers, was settled this year with the
defendants agreeing to pay approximately $143 million in cash and free music
CDs for engaging in these sales practices.
During this fiscal year, the Attorney
General and nine other attorneys general obtained a significant federal court
judgment against the Microsoft Corporation following a lengthy trial. In addition to an injunction modifying
Microsoft’s business practices, the company will pay $28.6 million to the
states to cover costs and fees and for future enforcement and compliance.
As part of a multistate effort, the
Antitrust Department filed a lawsuit which helped block a proposed merger
between the only two nationwide direct broadcast satellite television
providers, EchoStar Communications Corp. and Hughes Electronic Corp. The proposed merger would have eliminated
consumer options in Direct Broadcast Service (DBS) in violation of the Clayton
Act. Attorney General Blumenthal
proposed legislation this year that would stop price gouging for retail
milk. The Attorney General noted that
while prices paid for milk to dairy farmers in New England had hit an all-time
low, retail prices for milk had remained at historically high levels. The Department is also conducting an ongoing
investigation of retail milk prices and is reviewing a potential merger between
HP Hood and another large processor, National Dairy Holdings.
The Attorney General, along with
Massachusetts, reached an agreement with Stericycle, Inc. of Lake Forest,
Illinois to maintain competition in conjunction with the medical waste disposal
company’s acquisition of two other medical waste disposal companies. A settlement was reached with Lawrence
& Memorial Hospital and Anesthesia Associates of New London concerning a
restrictive employment agreement that will now allow a key, local area, pain
management physician to consult with patients and provide in-home care to those
enrolled in the Hospice of Southeastern Connecticut program.
This year Attorney General Blumenthal,
as a part of his competition advocacy program, filed extensive comments with
the Federal Communications Commission strongly criticizing the relaxation of
media multiple and cross-ownership rules which will severely reduce diversity
in what the public sees, hears, and reads – with powerful, practical costs to
our democracy.
The Attorney General, with the support
of Governor John G. Rowland and state Comptroller Nancy Wyman, filed an
antitrust lawsuit against Oracle, one of the top suppliers of financial, human
resources, and related software for large businesses and government agencies,
to block its hostile takeover bid for rival software company PeopleSoft,
Inc. The lawsuit alleges that the
acquisition would directly damage the state and its economy, and raise prices
for businesses, governments and consumers by significantly reducing competition
in the markets PeopleSoft serves, forcing current PeopleSoft customers to
replace their software with other companies’ (namely Oracle’s) products.
Child
Protection
This
department with over 40 attorneys is dedicated to protecting the children of
the State of Connecticut from abuse and neglect and has continued to
successfully represent the Department of Children and Families in state and
federal court litigation.
In re Clark K., the Court held
that the pendency of criminal proceedings against a parent should not delay
proceedings on TPR petitions before the Superior Court for Juvenile
Matters. The Court rejected the
argument that the Fifth Amendment prevents the parent from testifying in the
TPR trial, noting that it is the parent’s choice whether to remain silent. In re Jeffrey C., the Supreme court found that under the
circumstances of the case, the court orders were sufficiently clear that
failure to comply could result in contempt.
In re Salvatore P., the
Appellate Court affirmed a TPR judgment finding that the record did not support
the claim that a mother’s absence from the trial was the result of duress and
that the mother had the burden of proving duress. In re Brea B., the Appellate Court upheld the trial
court’s TPR judgment based on a finding of no ongoing parent-child;
relationship. The trial court correctly
gave no weight to the quality and nature of the relationship before the
Appellant attacked the child; relationships at the time of filing the TPR
petition are relevant. In re
Jennifer W., the Appellate Court upheld a TPR judgment rejecting the claim
that the trial court must as a matter of constitutional law hold a separate
hearing on whether parental progress after filing the TPR petition is
sufficient to defeat the petition. The
court may, but is not obligated to, consider the parent’s progress in the
adjudicatory phase when failure to rehabilitate is claimed. In re Shonna K., the Court found that
it had jurisdiction over adults previously committed as minors to DCF, if such
individuals remain under DCF’s supervision or care on a voluntary basis,
notwithstanding reaching adulthood. In re Steven M, the Court held that §
17a-12(a) requires the trial court, in determining whether to transfer a
dangerous juvenile committed to DCF as a delinquent to the custody of the
Department of Correction, to consider, at a hearing, both the best interest of
the individual and the danger posed by him to other juveniles. The juvenile’s liberty interest requires a
hearing on this matter which meets the fundamental fairness requirement of due
process.
Environment
A substantial part of our efforts this
past year involved several significant court matters related to air
quality. We continued to vigorously
pursue critical litigation under the Clean Air Act against Midwest Power
Companies because the pollutants they spew into the air, carried by the
prevailing winds into Connecticut, ruin our environment. The first of these cases, the Ohio Edison
Power Company case, was tried in Ohio and the court ruled in our favor on all
counts. We are now entering the penalty
phase of the lawsuit.
We filed, along with several other
states, a court challenge to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA)
rollback of important and protective laws regarding air pollution—the New
Source Review laws. EPA substantially
weakened the protection of the Clean Air Act by changing regulations designed
to require old facilities to install modern pollution controls when making
major modifications to the facilities.
Our suit seeks to stop the EPA from implementing these new rules.
We filed another suit against EPA for
failing to regulate the pollutant most responsible for global warming—carbon
dioxide. In spite of EPA’s own accepted
scientific data that global warming is a real and serious threat, EPA has
refused to limit carbon dioxide emissions.
The lawsuit seeks to require EPA to regulate carbon dioxide by setting
emission limits.
We continued our efforts to protect Long
Island Sound against environmentally destructive intrusions. We successfully defended the Department of
Environmental Protection (DEP) against a mandamus action brought by the
Cross-Sound Cable Company in which the plaintiff asked the court to order the
DEP to allow it to operate its cable in violation of a legislative moratorium
on the processing of applications. We represent the DEP in Islander East’s
challenge to DEP’s denial of a Coastal Zone Management Act consistency
determination.
We had several successful trials this
year. We won a vital and hard-fought
battle against Light Sources, Inc., affiliated companies, and a corporate
officer. The defendants polluted
important wetlands and watercourses with mercury from their light bulb
manufacturing operations. The court
awarded a million dollar penalty and required the defendant to spend hundreds
of thousands more to clean up the contamination it caused. In a case against
Cover-It, related companies and its president for numerous hazardous waste
violations, the court awarded the state a $757,000 penalty. In another trial against General Heat Treat,
Inc. for hazardous waste violations, we obtained a penalty of $50,000 and
sweeping injunctive relief.
In continuation of our efforts to
effectively use and preserve the Connecticut Environmental Protection Act, we
filed suit against Goodspeed Airport, LLC and Timothy Mellon for clear-cutting
a unique and important forest along the Connecticut River.
We continued our representation of state
agencies in important administrative proceedings. In Rocque v. Olin Corp., we represented the DEP in a
hearing proceeding against several parties responsible for widespread
contamination of a school and neighboring community. We assisted in negotiating a resolution that will result in the
neighborhood and school grounds being cleaned up.
We carried on our representation of the
Department of Agriculture (DOA) in saving abused animals. In State v. Six Horses, we obtained a
judgment from the court turning over custody and ownership of six mistreated
horses to the state.
In addition to the enforcement of
environmental laws, we forged ahead to successfully prosecute the seizure of
vehicles used in violating environmental laws; to represent the state’s
interest in litigation associated with the clean-up of superfund sites; to
advocate for the DEP and DOA in bankruptcy proceedings where the state has a
claim or an interest; and to defend these agencies and their staff in lawsuits
filed against them. We continued to
provide a full range of legal services to the DOA and the DEP including the
review of contracts, and the provision of legal advice and counseling.
Finance & Public Utilities
The Finance and Public Utilities
Department provides legal services to state agencies which regulate insurance,
banking, securities and public utilities, as well as the Department of Economic
and Community Development, the Office of Policy and Management, the Bond
Commission, and the Insurance Purchasing and Risk Management Board. Legal issues involving state regulation of
the financial services industry including banking, insurance and securities
form a major part of this Department's work.
One of the most oppressive forms of
consumer abuse burgeoning on the horizon is abusive mortgage lending or “predatory
lending” in which consumers are enticed into purchasing high-cost, high-fee
home loans and often second mortgage loans which they cannot repay or
refinance. In our continuing efforts to
combat predatory lending, we actively pursue predatory lending complaints. We are also active participants on a NAAG
predatory lending multi-state working group to target and prosecute predatory
lenders nationwide. As part of the
multi-state group, we investigated and pursued litigation against Household
Finance. As a result of this action,
Household agreed to pay $484,000,000 in restitution to consumers in the 50
states and the District of Columbia.
Our state court granted a Consent Judgment against Household in the
amount of $6,052,060 in restitution to Connecticut’s consumers. The Court also granted important injunctive
relief relating to Household’s lending practices.
We provided legal support to our client
agencies in many areas including market conduct examinations, insurance
examinations, insolvencies, and regulation of producers. In addition, in our continuing efforts to
protect consumers against identity theft, the Attorney General sent letters to
all of the major insurance companies conducting business in Connecticut urging
them to ban the use of social security numbers on member identification
cards. The department has seen
tremendous growth in telecommunications cases and its work for the Connecticut
Siting Council ("CSC"). With
over 300 competitors licensed to compete with SNET, we have recently
experienced a dramatic increase in Federal District Court cases under the
Federal Telecommunications Act. The
CSC, for which this unit is statutory counsel, conducted some of the most
controversial challenges in its 30-year history. In addition, we are involved in a number of Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission dockets involving market based pricing initiatives and
expanded regional market pools as well as litigation involving the bankruptcy
of NRG, a principal electric supplier to Connecticut.
In Boy Scouts of America v. Wyman, the Second Circuit
Court of Appeals held that the State Comptroller and the State Employees
Campaign Committee (“SECC”) did not violate the Scouts’ First Amendment rights
of association when they excluded them from the State’s United Way Campaign
because the Scouts discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.
Child Support
This Department provides legal services
to the Department of Social Services Bureau of Child Support Enforcement and
the Support Enforcement Services division of the Judicial Branch pursuant to a
cooperative agreement designed to satisfy Connecticut’s responsibilities under
the Child Support provisions of Title IV-D of the Social Security Act and
related State laws.
The Child Support Department has
traditionally experienced a significant litigation caseload. Fiscal 2002-2003 again brought significant
activity in all operational categories.
Professional and support staff handled more than 10,300 new referrals
and closed out over 9,100 cases. There
was considerable activity in the paternity area with 2,034 new filings, 2,025
closings and 1,356 determinations (judgments and voluntary
acknowledgements). In addition,
Department attorneys made more than 5,000 court appearances in interstate
support matters brought pursuant to the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act.
Department attorneys won several
important judicial victories during the year which will assist in child support
collections and continued to work closely with the Department of Social
Services, Bureau of Child Support Enforcement, the Support Enforcement Services
division of the Judicial Branch and court operations staff in the ongoing
effort to ensure that mandatory federal performance standards are met. The Attorney General’s office is an active
member of the Partners Executive Council and department staff continue to be
involved in the development of new child support legislative initiatives
designed to facilitate the establishment, enforcement and collection of child
support orders. To that end, this
department continues to work closely with other IV-D agencies in publishing
wanted posters which identify some of Connecticut’s most seriously delinquent
child support obligors, participates on the Advisory Council for Connecticut
Fatherhood Initiative efforts and on the Child Support Guidelines
Commission. Through the combined
efforts of the participating IV-D agencies, child support collection reached
$259.7 million in SFY 02/03.
Consumer Protection
The focus of this department is consumer
protection through counsel and representation of the Department of Consumer
Protection; consumer education and complaint mediation; investigations; written
comment to state and federal agencies, and litigation under various state and
federal laws, with a major reliance on the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices
Act (CUTPA).
Our Consumer Assistance Unit (CAU)
responded to approximately 5,564 consumer complaints, many with the help of
thirteen senior volunteers. Over $985,830.22 was refunded or credited to
Connecticut consumers this fiscal year due to the efforts of CAU. Through its Senior Volunteer Advocates
Program, this office presented Consumer Universities across the state about a
variety of issues, including identity theft and Internet and telemarketing
fraud.
The department continued to assist the
Attorney General in providing alerts to consumers on a variety of topics.
Consumer alerts this fiscal year included information about shopping wisely at
Ames liquidation sales following its bankruptcy declaration, and a warning to
consumers about a scam commonly known as “Nigerian letters,” in which con
artists using the Internet or the U.S. Postal Service seek to obtain the bank
account numbers of consumers and businesses by promising to transfer millions
out of foreign countries and into the victims’ bank accounts.
One example of the enforcement activity
the department engages in to assist the Attorney General on behalf of the State
is a Stipulated Judgment the department obtained against the Ford Motor
Company, as part of a settlement of the multistate investigation of Ford’s
marketing and sale of sports utility vehicles (SUVs). The Connecticut judgment provides for a total payment to
Connecticut of $919,770, as well as the funding of a $30 million national
Public Service campaign to correct consumer misimpressions regarding the proper
use and handling of SUVs.
The department facilitated judgments in
a number of telecommunications matters addressing deceptive business practices
by companies that sold or billed callers they kept on hold waiting for a
“psychic”; or charged monthly rental fees for rotary phones that consumers
either never possessed or had returned; or claimed to provide an “800 number” information
service without disclosing that callers would be charged for the service; or
failed to disclose material contract terms to consumers who purchased satellite
programming and equipment, or overcharged consumers who used the widely
advertised 10-10-220 “dial-around” number by failing to use the proper billing
code.
The department settled litigation
brought against Time, Inc., in the Attorney General’s continued efforts to
force sweepstakes companies to be accountable in their promotional mailing
practices. Time was ordered to pay
restitution of $73,000 to 110 Connecticut consumers who suffered significant
financial loss due to the misleading sweepstakes mailings. In addition, restitution of $793,000 was
underway this fiscal year to 775 Connecticut customers of Publishers Clearing
House (PCH) as part of the 2001 settlement of litigation brought by the Office
and 25 other states to prevent PCH from issuing deceptive sweepstakes mailings.
The department currently is proceeding
with litigation against SBC Communications, Inc., and several of its
affiliates, including Southern New England Telecommunications Corp., for
selling expensive ads for large countywide or regional telephone directories to
businesses by falsely telling advertisers they were eliminating all smaller
directories, and against Newtown Oil and its principals for entering into
prepaid home heating oil contracts for the 2002-2003 heating season with
hundreds of Connecticut consumers that they knew they could not fulfill. The department
obtained over $100,000 in civil penalties in a Stipulated Judgment against
Opticare for sending bills indicating consumers were obligated to pay for
health and optical services for which their health carriers were responsible.
The department succeeded in getting Exxon Mobil Corporation to implement major
new policies to reduce the sale of tobacco products to minors, a continuing
concern of the Attorney General. The
department obtained a Stipulated Judgment against Prudential Connecticut Real
Estate (PCRE) with a $145,000 payment to the State for charging an alleged
“Regulatory Compliance” fee of $150 on real estate transactions when, in fact,
no regulation required such a fee.
Fraudulent billing practices of
companies who do business on the Internet were addressed by the
department. For example, the
department, along with over a dozen other states and the FTC, filed suit
against Alyon Technology, Inc. for billing consumers for connecting to adult
Internet content who denied making the connection, never accepted the terms to
connect, and never authorized anyone in their household to make such a
connection. The office took other action, including reaching an agreement with
DoubleClick, a leading Internet advertising company, to protect consumers’
online privacy after the company had been invisibly tracking nearly every
online consumer without the consumer’s knowledge.
The department aided the Attorney
General’s participation on behalf of the State before the Department of Public
Utility Control (DPUC) and other state and federal agencies this fiscal year
concerning issues relating to electricity.
For example, the Attorney General appealed the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission’s (FERC) approval of Standard Market Design (SMD) to the U.S. Court
of Appeals to stop implementation of the rules. In another matter, the DPUC agreed with the Attorney General’s
opposition to CL&P’s attempt to seek relief from the standard offer rate
cap to pay their suppliers more, which would have resulted in a $218 million
rate increase to consumers. On a
related matter, the Attorney General successfully opposed the termination of
NRG’s standard offer supply contract, and went to the FERC to require NRG to
continue to provide power under the contract despite the company’s bankruptcy
proceedings.
Employment Rights
The Attorney General’s Office continues
to maintain an active employment rights practice, defending state agencies in
employment related litigation and providing advice and guidance to state agencies
on employment issues. We are currently
defending the state in approximately 170 employment cases in the federal and
state courts, as well as a similar number of complaints before the Connecticut
Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities and the Equal Employment
Opportunities Commission. We have
successfully defended the state at trial in several cases, prevailed on motions
in others, and achieved numerous settlements that were favorable to the state,
saving the state millions of dollars. The office also represented the
Department of Correction in a class action lawsuit that resulted in positive
changes in the way that sexual harassment and retaliation complaints are
investigated, prevented and disciplined.
Public Safety & Special Revenue
A substantial portion of our work is in defense of the state in
lawsuits brought by and on behalf of prisoners. We continue to defend a large number of lawsuits challenging
conditions of confinement in state correctional facilities and the
administration of community programs.
These lawsuits collectively seek millions of dollars in money damages
and seek to challenge and restrict the statutory authority and discretion of
the Department of Correction. Our
efforts in defense of these cases save the State of Connecticut millions of
dollars in claimed damages, and preserve the state's authority in administering
a growing prison population. In
addition, this department has assisted in the collection of thousands of dollars
in costs of incarceration.
In carrying out our duties to promote
public safety, we defended several cases involving significant public safety
issues during the past fiscal year. Doe
v. Lee, argued personally by the Attorney General before the United States
Supreme Court, upheld Connecticut’s Sex Offender Registration statutes allowing
public access to information on sex offenders in Connecticut.
We continue to defend numerous challenges
to the application of the "good time" statutes to multiple sentences.
There are two significant cases pending in the Appellate Court which will
determine how the Department of Correction calculates “jail credit” when there
are multiple sentences. In addition, we
are involved in a class action lawsuit challenging the Department of
Correction's strip search policy.
We have pending before the Connecticut
Supreme a case which will decide whether the Patients Bill of Rights applies to
the Department of Correction. In
addition, we are currently handling a number of wrongful death cases which will
be impacted by a decision in the Patients Bill of Rights case.
We have taken over the responsibility
for the defense and representation of almost all the lawsuits involving the
State Police seeking money damages.
Under this program, the state retains direct liability, indemnification
and, through this office, defense responsibilities for the majority of cases
filed. Our caseload of police
litigation continues to grow, as expected, and the cost savings to the State of
Connecticut continue to rise. In the
past year, we successfully litigated a number of such cases and received
favorable jury verdicts in several.
During the past year, we continued to
provide legal advice and representation to the Division of Special Revenue
regarding a variety of complex and significant issues related to legalized
gambling, including gambling at the state's two casinos. We have written
several significant advisory opinions concerning permissible activities under
the Gaming Compacts with the Mohegan Tribe and the Mashantucket Pequot
Tribe. During the past year, we have
also provided the Liquor Control Division with advice on a number of legal
issues concerning enforcement of the liquor law.
We are presently involved in a complex
class action lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the policy of
strip-searching youths detained in the juvenile detention facilities which
could have a significant impact on the operations of the juvenile detention
facilities. We are also involved in the Emily J. consent decree which affects
the State’s juvenile detention centers.
Transportation
This department provides representation
for the following state agencies:
Department of Transportation ("DOT"); Department of Public
Works ("DPW"); Department of Administrative Services
("DAS"); Department of Motor Vehicles ("DMV"); Department
of Information Technology ("DOIT"); Department of Economic and
Community Development, Housing Matters ("DECD"); and the Connecticut
Historical Commission. In addition,
this Department provides representation for various occupational licensing
boards within the Department of Consumer Protection ("DCP").
As a result of the large number of
public works projects undertaken by the State during any given year, and the
broad scope and complexity of many of these projects, there is a continuing
need for the attorneys to provide legal assistance to the DOT and DPW on public
contracting issues, the resolution of bid protests, the interpretation of
contract language, and other problems that eventually arise during the course
of large construction projects. This
department and DOT’s roads and bridges specifications committee have spent the
last two years drafting and negotiating new construction claims specifications
which will help the State negotiate construction claims brought by construction
contractors against the DOT.
Despite the best efforts of all
involved, some construction problems simply cannot be resolved to the
satisfaction of the parties and thus claims for money damages are made against
the State. Our attorneys assist agency
personnel with early analysis and settlement negotiations in an attempt to
quickly resolve outstanding disputes and minimize the potential adverse
financial impact of such claims on the public treasury. Nevertheless, a certain number of claims,
both legal and monetary end up in court or arbitration. During the past fiscal year, the Department
was successful in protecting the interests of the State and its taxpayers in
several cases. For example, the
field-testing of the leaks and anchor bolt problems at the University of
Connecticut Law Library has just concluded and we anticipate that the State
will be seeking compensation for damages against several of the entities that
constructed the building. The Gold Star
Bridge arbitration has been ongoing for nearly ten (10) years; we anticipate
that that arbitration in the White Oak matter ($150 million) will go on for at
least two (2) years.
Our DOT representation also covers all
matters relating to eminent domain and rights-of-way issues; any issues as to
properties and facilities including all I-95 and the Merritt Parkway
facilities; aviation and ports; public transit; rails; and all environmental
matters including permitting, salt sheds, and maintenance facilities located
throughout the State. This past year we
closed 70 eminent domain cases through settlement or trial while 69 new eminent
domain cases arrived. A few of our
eminent domain cases have involved the taking of property which has needed
environmental remediation.
Our representation of DPW also consists
of construction matters as well as handling a large amount of leasing, property
management, and environmental challenges on siting issues such as the proposed
construction of the Bridgeport Juvenile Correction Facility and the Litchfield
Courthouse. During the past year, we
provided legal counsel and review of 155 leases and other real estate
transactions for DPW.
In addition to the noted construction
contracting matters, this Department is deeply involved in various
environmental matters associated with public works projects, roads and bridges
projects, and other activities of our client agencies to ensure compliance with
applicable federal and state environmental laws in the planning of projects and
the operation of state facilities.
Currently our attorneys are working
closely with DOT, DPW and DAS to help them meet their new responsibilities
pursuant to Public Act 03-215 which requires that all bidders on Public and DOT
building projects in excess of $500,000 be prequalified prior to bidding. The prequalification process goes into
effect on July 1, 2004.
Special Litigation
This department represents the Governor,
the Judicial Branch, the General Assembly, the Secretary of the State, the
Treasurer, the Comptroller, the Auditors, the State Elections Enforcement
Commission, the State Ethics Commission, the State Properties Review Board, the
Judicial Review Council, the Judicial Selection Commission, the Office of
Protection and Advocacy for Handicapped and Developmentally Disabled Persons,
the Accountancy Board, the Office of the Child Advocate, the Commission on
Children, and the Latino and Puerto Rican Affairs Commission. In addition, through its Public Charities
Unit, the department protects the public interest in gifts, bequests and
devises for charitable purposes; and in cooperation with the Department of
Consumer Protection, administers and enforces state laws regulating charities
and professional fundraisers who solicit from the public.
In the area of charitable trusts and
gifts, the department brought actions against several entities to ensure that
charitable gifts were being used for the purposes for which they were given. In the area of charitable solicitations, the
Public Charities Unit initiated and/or settled a number of significant cases
involving misuse of funds solicited from the public. The Attorney General recently obtained court approval of a new
healthcare foundation that will receive the charitable funds generated by the
sale of Sharon Hospital to a for-profit company. The new charitable foundation will use the funds to provide
healthcare services to the citizens of northwest Connecticut. The Attorney General also initiated a major lawsuit
against Yale-New Haven Hospital to ensure that the hospital properly
administers and distributes its “free bed funds,” charitable donations given to
the hospital to fund free patient care for needy citizens.
The Unit continues to monitor solicitations
by charitable organizations, and provides information to members of the public
to assist them in making informed decisions on charitable giving. Currently, 7,900 charities, and 91
professional fundraisers are registered with the state. Of $13.9 million donated to professional
telephone solicitors for charitable organizations in 2002 only $4.5 million, or
32.4 percent of the total money collected, was actually turned over to the
organizations to which the donors thought they were giving. The department makes this information
available to the public so individuals can make informed decisions on
contributing to charities.
The department also represents the
interests of the people of the state in matters before the Bureau of Indian
Affairs in the United States Department of the Interior and in litigation
involving land claims brought by groups claiming Indian ancestry. The department is actively involved in
reviewing, researching and responding to petitions filed by a number of groups
currently seeking federal recognition, including the Golden Hill Paugussetts,
the Eastern Pequots and the Paucatuck Eastern Pequots, the Hassanamisco Nipmucs
and the Schaghticokes. The department
has been litigating a federal court action against the United States Department
of the Interior to ensure that the Bureau of Indian Affairs conducts its
recognition proceedings in a fundamentally fair manner. The department also provides advice and
counsel to numerous state agencies regarding issues of Indian law.
The department also has participated in
litigation and various regulatory proceedings to prevent harm to Long Island
Sound posed by a number of energy projects, including the installation and
operation of the Cross-Sound electric cable and the Islander East natural gas
pipeline. The Department has initiated
several court and administrative proceedings related to nuclear safety issues
regarding the Indian Point Nuclear Facility located in Buchanan, New York,
which is within eleven miles of Fairfield County.
The department plays a leading role in the preparation of appeals
throughout the office. This year, the
department’s attorneys briefed and/or argued a number of significant cases in
the State Appellate Court, and the State Supreme Court, the Second Circuit
Court of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court. This year, the Department has prosecuted a series of appeals in
the Connecticut Supreme Court raising significant issues relating to the
State’s sovereign immunity from suit.
Collections & Revenue Enhancement
The mission of the department is to
expeditiously and efficiently collect monies owed to the State. It represents the Financial Services Center
of the Department of Administrative Services and also provides representation
in connection with certain collection activities of the Department of Social
Services, the Department of Labor, the Department of Correction, John Dempsey
Hospital, the Second Injury Fund, the Connecticut State University System, the
Department of Higher Education, the Secretary of State and various other state
agencies by specific request.
In fiscal 2002-2003, the department
collected cash in excess of $27,000.
This represents a significant increase over collections in the prior
fiscal years. In addition to these cash
receipts, the Department’s attorneys acquired security interests in the form of
judgment liens, mortgages and statutory liens valued at nearly $40,000,000.
Department staff were actively engaged in
a wide variety of litigation activities that resulted in significant recovery
including In re WorldCom, et al. a bankruptcy matter which resulted in
the recovery of over $13.5 million in unpaid sales and use taxes; Estate of
Flora Sullivan, which resulted in the recovery of more than $622,000 through
the enforcement of a statutory lien against proceeds of a cause of action
securing reimbursement of public assistance benefits; In re Vanstar
International Corp. resulting in the recovery of unpaid taxes in excess of
$250,000; and Estate of James Saunders resulting in the recovery of over
$575,000 in accident-related Medicaid payments.
Finally, through the efforts of
Department staff, over $120,000 in unpaid wages were recovered for recalcitrant
employees and distributed to Connecticut workers.
Education, Mental Retardation and Health
This department represents the
health-related and educational agencies of the State of Connecticut. It represents the Department of Social
Services, Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services, Department of
Mental Retardation Psychiatric Security Review Board, Department of Veterans’
Affairs, Commission on Medical and Legal Investigations overseeing the Office
of the Chief Medical Examiner, Department of Public Health, Office of Health
Care Access, and the various health licensing boards. The department also represents the State Board of Education, the
Department of Higher Education and all constituent units of higher education.
The Attorney General commenced an action
on behalf of the University of Connecticut against the Atlantic Coast
Conference and the University of Miami seeking to prevent the defection of
Miami and other colleges from the Big East Conference to the ACC. The lawsuit was brought to protect the
viability of the Big East Conference, as well as Connecticut’s financial and
educational interests. The case is
pending.
The most significant health related case
the department dealt with last year was related to the quality of care in
health care institutions. The Supreme
Court rendered its decision in Salmon v. Department of Public Health and
Addiction Services, and affirmed the position of the State that resident
abuse must be determined using an objective standard as to whether the patient
was abused as opposed to a subjective one, dependent upon proof of actual harm
to a patient. In the particular facts
of the Salmon case, the acuity of the patient’s mind was at issue, and the
abuse was verbal. The Court’s decision
will serve to protect vulnerable patients from abuse by health care workers.
The Department was also involved in
several nursing home receivership and bankruptcy proceedings involving Vencor,
Mariner, Sun Healthcare, and Olympus. The focus of these proceedings is first to
ensure that the patients are provided quality care, and second, the resources
provided the homes under the Medicaid program are properly utilized. Currently,
we are involved in actions concerning Atrium and Strawberry Hills, and a
receivership is currently pending involving Pegasus. We also assisted the Department of Public Health in efforts to
improve the quality of care in hospitals and the State’s psychiatric facilities
through enforcement of quality standards.
Water company issues are another area
that was very active. There were a
number of significant decisions received which will aid the Department of
Public Health in enforcing drinking water standards and the protection of water
company lands. For example, in the case
of the Town of Wallingford v. Department of Public Health, the Court
upheld the Department’s determination that municipal land falling within the
classification scheme for water company land was subject to the Department’s
regulation. The case is now before the
Connecticut Supreme Court. In Jacobowitz
v. Department of Public Health, the Court held that the owner’s attempt to
balkanize the water system into municipal entities to escape regulation could
not be done. In Na-Mor, Inc. v. Department
of Public Health, the Court reviewed the design criteria used to evaluate
whether water operations constitute a public water system.
In a more broad based public health
decision, the Appellate Court in Pinchbeck v. Department of Public Health,
upheld the determination a neighbor did not have the standing to appeal a decision
involving a neighbor’s procurement of a permit for a septic tank. With respect to the care of children, the
Appellate Court in Elf v. Department of Public Health, upheld a
decision of license revocation which was challenged on the basis the evidence
was insufficient to merit such action.
An expanding area of the Department’s
focus is that of Protective Services for the Elderly. On numerous occasions throughout the year, we initiated on behalf
of the Protective Services for the Elderly Division of the Department of Social
Services actions to protect elderly citizens from abuse and neglect. These actions were initiated in response to
a number of conditions including the failure of caregivers to provide proper
medical care, and basic necessities such as food and a clean environment. Increasingly these cases also involve the
misuse of the assets of the elderly who are not in a position to protect
themselves, and it may include family members.
In the last legislative session, the Attorney General’s Office sponsored
legislation to strengthen the ability of the Department of Social Services and
this Office to protect the elderly through investigatory proceedings which will
allow the appropriate informed decision to be made before the initiation of an
action in the Probate Courts seeking protection for the individual. It will also assist in ensuring the
Department can obtain access to individuals in need of protection.
With the enactment of new legislation
with respect to the transfer of assets by probate court decision, and the
effect which such transfers have on qualifying for Medicaid, our involvement in
those courts increased.
With respect to protecting the State’s
fisc, we were successful in an action entitled McCoy v. State of Connecticut,
in obtaining a decision that any outstanding obligations with respect to care
and treatment must be satisfied when a former patient seeks damages from the
State.
A very significant decision was rendered
by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Joanne Knight v. Department of
Public Health. The Court rejected
a plaintiff’s claimed that her First Amendment Rights were violated when the
Department disciplined her for prosthetizing patients who were receiving care
from a home health agency.
Workers Compensation/Labor
The Workers’ Compensation and Labor
Relations Department represents the Treasurer as the Custodian of the Second
Injury Fund, the Workers’ Compensation Commission and the Department of
Administrative Services in its capacity as the administrator of the state
employees’ workers’ compensation program, as well as DAS Personnel, the Labor
Department, the Office of Labor Relations, the Office of Claims Commissioner,
the State Employees Retirement Commission, the Teachers’ Retirement Board, and
others. The department’s worker’s
compensation staff represents the Second Injury Fund in cases involving
potential liability of the Fund for workers’ compensation benefits and the
State of Connecticut contested workers’ compensation claims filed by state
employees, while the labor relations attorneys represent the Department of
Labor in unemployment compensation appeals to the Superior Court. The department’s workers’ compensation
attorneys and paralegals also spend significant time on third party tort-feasor
cases that result in the recovery of money for both the state and the Fund, as
well as handling a large number of appeals to the Compensation Review Board and
on to the Appellate and Supreme Courts.
During the past fiscal year, department
attorneys and paralegals appeared for the Fund and the State in over 2000
hearings before workers’ compensation commissioners, while Labor relations
attorneys appeared before the Superior Court in over 150 unemployment
compensation cases.
In addition, department attorneys and
paralegals were responsible for recouping $373,237.12 for the Second Injury
Fund and $491,270.15 for the State of Connecticut through third party
interventions. This money represents a
reimbursement to the state or Second Injury Fund of money which has been paid
out in workers’ compensation benefits for injuries caused by a third
party.
Healthcare Fraud/Whistleblower
The Healthcare
Fraud/Whistleblower/Health Insurance Advocacy Department had another important
and busy year. The Whistleblower Unit
issued several reports jointly with the Child Advocate concerning the
inadequate job being done to protect Connecticut’s children, particularly at
the Connecticut Juvenile Training School.
Another in depth report concerned the Amity Regional School District’s
administrative and financial management.
The Health Care Fraud unit recovered
$2.2 million from a clinical laboratory in addition to other recoveries,
bringing the Unit’s total recoveries over $35 million in six years. In addition, lawsuits were filed against
seven pharmaceutical manufacturers for illegally manipulating the average
wholesale prices reported to the Connecticut Medicaid program.
The Health Insurance Advocacy unit
assisted 404 people, many in need of potentially lifesaving procedures,
bringing insurance coverage worth $2,339,777.30 to those affected. The Unit also worked on several pieces of
legislation resulting in better health insurance protection, including acts
which expand availability of insurance coverage to small businesses and begin
to regulate managed care subcontractors, so called “carve-outs.”
This department and the Attorney General
have also been actively seeking to recover the $220 million lost by the
Connecticut Resource Recovery Authority in the Enron bankruptcy. Our work has included the filing of multiple
lawsuits against Enron officers, banks, law firms and CRRA’s legal advisors.
Human Rights & Torts
This department represents the
Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities, and prosecutes all cases of
discrimination in housing, public accommodations, and credit practices. The department also represents various state
agencies and state officers in the defense of high exposure personal injury
cases. Members of this department have
implemented trial advocacy programs for the office, and others have served as
instructors at civil rights seminars for members of the bar and the public.
The department has favorably resolved
many complex tort cases, including some in which decedents’ estates initially
sought tens of millions of dollars in damages.
The CHRO has referred dozens of new civil rights cases to be prosecuted
by this department, and judgments in excess of $150,000 have been obtained for
victims of discrimination.
