Section 47a-7
- Citation
- Section 47a-7
- Parent Document
- Bourke v. Stamford Hospital, 696 A.2d 1072 (1996)
- Jurisdiction
- Connecticut (state)
- Effective Date
- 1996-11-07
Other Sections in This Document (27)
- Bourke v. Stamford Hospital, 696 A.2d 1072 (1996)
- Bourke v. Stamford Hospital, 696 A.2d 1072 (1996)
- Bourke v. Stamford Hospital, 696 A.2d 1072 (1996)
- Bourke v. Stamford Hospital, 696 A.2d 1072 (1996)
- Bourke v. Stamford Hospital, 696 A.2d 1072 (1996)
- Bourke v. Stamford Hospital, 696 A.2d 1072 (1996)
- Bourke v. Stamford Hospital, 696 A.2d 1072 (1996)
- Bourke v. Stamford Hospital, 696 A.2d 1072 (1996)
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
- Section 47a-7
Full Text
534 charsIn summary, the court concludes that a reasonably strict construction of § 47a-13 establishes that a recovery of personal injury damages is neither consistent with the overall statutory scheme nor supported by the legislative history. A recovery of double damages under § 47a-13 involves punishment and deterrence as well as compensation, and, therefore, must be viewed as being punitive in nature. Allowing such a double recovery for personal injuries would so enormously and disproportionately exceed the expressly contemplated *553