(a) A person who has exhausted all administrative remedies available within the agency and who is aggrieved by a final decision may appeal to the Superior Court as provided in this section. The filing of a petition for reconsideration is not a prerequisite to the filing of such an appeal.

(b) A person may appeal a preliminary, procedural or intermediate agency action or ruling to the Superior Court if (1) it appears likely that the person will otherwise qualify under this chapter to appeal from the final agency action or ruling and (2) postponement of the appeal would result in an inadequate remedy.

(c) (1) Within forty-five days after mailing of the final decision under section 4-180 or, if there is no mailing, within forty-five days after personal delivery of the final decision under said section, or (2) within forty-five days after the agency denies a petition for reconsideration of the final decision pursuant to subdivision (1) of subsection (a) of section 4-181a, or (3) within forty-five days after mailing of the final decision made after reconsideration pursuant to subdivisions (3) and (4) of subsection (a) of section 4-181a or, if there is no mailing, within forty-five days after personal delivery of the final decision made after reconsideration pursuant to said subdivisions, or (4) within forty-five days after the expiration of the ninety-day period required under subdivision (3) of subsection (a) of section 4-181a if the agency decides to reconsider the final decision and fails to render a decision made after reconsideration within such period, whichever is applicable and is later, a person appealing as provided in this section shall serve a copy of the appeal on the agency that rendered the final decision at its office or at the office of the Attorney General in Hartford and file the appeal with the clerk of the superior court for the judicial district of New Britain or for the judicial district wherein the person appealing resides or, if that person is not a resident of this state, with the clerk of the court for the judicial district of New Britain. Within that time, the person appealing shall also serve a copy of the appeal on each party listed in the final decision at the address shown in the decision, provided failure to make such service within forty-five days on parties other than the agency that rendered the final decision shall not deprive the court of jurisdiction over the appeal. Service of the appeal shall be made by United States mail, certified or registered, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, without the use of a state marshal or other officer, or by personal service by a proper officer or indifferent person making service in the same manner as complaints are served in ordinary civil actions. If service of the appeal is made by mail, service shall be effective upon deposit of the appeal in the mail.

(d) The person appealing, not later than fifteen days after filing the appeal, shall file or cause to be filed with the clerk of the court an affidavit, or the state marshal's return, stating the date and manner in which a copy of the appeal was served on each party and on the agency that rendered the final decision, and, if service was not made on a party, the reason for failure to make service. If the failure to make service causes prejudice to any party to the appeal or to the agency, the court, after hearing, may dismiss the appeal.

(e) If service has not been made on a party, the court, on motion, shall make such orders of notice of the appeal as are reasonably calculated to notify each party not yet served.

(f) The filing of an appeal shall not, of itself, stay enforcement of an agency decision. An application for a stay may be made to the agency, to the court or to both. Filing of an application with the agency shall not preclude action by the court. A stay, if granted, shall be on appropriate terms.

(g) Within thirty days after the service of the appeal, or within such further time as may be allowed by the court, the agency shall transcribe any portion of the record that has not been transcribed and transmit to the reviewing court the original or a certified copy of the entire record of the proceeding appealed from, which shall include the agency's findings of fact and conclusions of law, separately stated. By stipulation of all parties to such appeal proceedings, the record may be shortened. A party unreasonably refusing to stipulate to limit the record may be taxed by the court for the additional costs. The court may require or permit subsequent corrections or additions to the record.

(h) If, before the date set for hearing on the merits of an appeal, application is made to the court for leave to present additional evidence, and it is shown to the satisfaction of the court that the additional evidence is material and that there were good reasons for failure to present it in the proceeding before the agency, the court may order that the additional evidence be taken before the agency upon conditions determined by the court. The agency may modify its findings and decision by reason of the additional evidence and shall file that evidence and any modifications, new findings, or decisions with the reviewing court.

(i) The appeal shall be conducted by the court without a jury and shall be confined to the record. If alleged irregularities in procedure before the agency are not shown in the record or if facts necessary to establish aggrievement are not shown in the record, proof limited thereto may be taken in the court. The court, upon request, shall hear oral argument and receive written briefs.

(j) The court shall not substitute its judgment for that of the agency as to the weight of the evidence on questions of fact. The court shall affirm the decision of the agency unless the court finds that substantial rights of the person appealing have been prejudiced because the administrative findings, inferences, conclusions, or decisions are: (1) In violation of constitutional or statutory provisions; (2) in excess of the statutory authority of the agency; (3) made upon unlawful procedure; (4) affected by other error of law; (5) clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the whole record; or (6) arbitrary or capricious or characterized by abuse of discretion or clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion. If the court finds such prejudice, it shall sustain the appeal and, if appropriate, may render a judgment under subsection (k) of this section or remand the case for further proceedings. For purposes of this section, a remand is a final judgment.

(k) If a particular agency action is required by law, the court, on sustaining the appeal, may render a judgment that modifies the agency decision, orders the particular agency action, or orders the agency to take such action as may be necessary to effect the particular action.

(l) In all appeals taken under this section, costs may be taxed in favor of the prevailing party in the same manner, and to the same extent, that costs are allowed in judgments rendered by the Superior Court. No costs shall be taxed against the state, except as provided in section 4-184a.

(m) In any case in which a person appealing claims that he cannot pay the costs of an appeal under this section, he shall, within the time permitted for filing the appeal, file with the clerk of the court to which the appeal is to be taken an application for waiver of payment of such fees, costs and necessary expenses, including the requirements of bond, if any. The application shall conform to the requirements prescribed by rule of the judges of the Superior Court. After such hearing as the court determines is necessary, the court shall render its judgment on the application, which judgment shall contain a statement of the facts the court has found, with its conclusions thereon. The filing of the application for the waiver shall toll the time limits for the filing of an appeal until such time as a judgment on such application is rendered.

(1971, P.A. 854, S. 18; P.A. 73-620, S. 12–14, 18, 19; P.A. 76-436, S. 252, 681; P.A. 77-603, S. 1, 125; P.A. 78-280, S. 10, 127; P.A. 79-163; P.A. 84-43, S. 1; P.A. 88-230, S. 1, 12; 88-317, S. 23, 107; P.A. 90-98, S. 1, 2; P.A. 93-142, S. 4, 7, 8; P.A. 95-220, S. 4–6; P.A. 99-39; 99-215, S. 24, 29; P.A. 00-99, S. 20, 154; P.A. 06-32, S. 2.)

History: P.A. 73-620 added proviso that in conflict between state and federal statutes or regulations, federal provisions prevail, required that record contain findings of fact and conclusions of law changed place for filing petition from Hartford county court of common pleas to court where aggrieved person resides and added Subsec. (h) re waiver of fees; P.A. 76-436 replaced court of common pleas with superior court and included judicial districts, effective July 1, 1978; P.A. 77-603 allowed party to file petition in Hartford county in certain instances, inserted new Subsec. (h) re costs and relettered former Subsec. (h) as Subsec. (i); P.A. 78-280 deleted references to court of common pleas and counties and replaced reference to Hartford county with “the judicial district of Hartford-New Britain”; P.A. 79-163 changed time for filing petition from 30 to 45 days after decision and provided for notifying agency of appeal; P.A. 84-43 amended Subsec. (b) by providing that if a rehearing is requested the time periods for filing a petition and serving copies of the petition runs from the “mailing of the notice” of the decision, and by providing that service may be made upon an agency by mail “without the use of a sheriff or other officer”; P.A. 88-230 replaced “judicial district of Hartford-New Britain” with “judicial district of Hartford”, effective September 1, 1991; P.A. 88-317 substantially amended the section, repealing, adding, rephrasing and reordering provisions, adding new subsections and relettering existing subsections, effective July 1, 1989, and applicable to all agency proceedings commencing on or after that date; P.A. 90-98 changed the effective date of P.A. 88-230 from September 1, 1991, to September 1, 1993; P.A. 93-142 changed the effective date of P.A. 88-230 from September 1, 1993, to September 1, 1996, effective June 14, 1993; P.A. 95-220 changed the effective date of P.A. 88-230 from September 1, 1996, to September 1, 1998, effective July 1, 1995; P.A. 99-39 amended Subsec. (c) by clarifying that service of appeal by mail is effective upon depositing appeal in mail; P.A. 99-215 replaced “judicial district of Hartford” with “judicial district of New Britain” in Subsec. (c), effective June 29, 1999; P.A. 00-99 changed reference to sheriff to state marshal in Subsecs. (c) and (d), effective December 1, 2000; P.A. 06-32 amended Subsec. (c) by designating existing provision re 45-day period after mailing or personal delivery of the final decision as new Subdiv. (1), adding new Subdivs. (2) to (4) re time periods applicable in the case of reconsideration of the final decision, specifying “whichever is applicable and is later” and deleting former subdiv. designators.

Cited. 168 C. 413; Id., 435; 171 C. 345; Id., 691; 172 C. 263. Applies to appeals from decisions of claims commission when not precluded by Sec. 4-164(b). Id., 603. Cited. 173 C. 352. To qualify under section for an appeal to the courts from final appeal of an administrative agency, one must demonstrate he is aggrieved by the decision, that he has a personal and legal interest in the subject matter and that such interest has been specially and adversely affected by the decision. Id., 384. Cited. Id., 462, 465, 467, 469; 176 C. 1; Id., 191; Id., 533; 177 C. 584; Id., 599; Id., 610; Id., 623; 179 C. 111; Id., 415; Id., 694; 183 C. 76; Id., 128; 184 C. 75; 186 C. 153; Id., 198; 188 C. 44. Exceptions to doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies discussed. Id., 90. Cited. Id., 152; 191 C. 173; Id., 384. An agency decision to reject a bid or to award a contract has none of the attributes of a formal hearing, nor is a formal hearing required by law; for this reason, the agency's decision does not involve a contested case and the disappointed bidder cannot assert standing under statute. Id., 497. Cited. 192 C. 234; 193 C. 379; 194 C. 677; 195 C. 534; Id., 543; 196 C. 451; 197 C. 320; 198 C. 445; 200 C. 261; 203 C. 295; 204 C. 17; Id., 67; Id., 259; Id., 609; Id., 672; 205 C. 116; Id., 767; 206 C. 636; 207 C. 296. Exhaustion doctrine discussed. Id., 346. Cited. Id., 547; Id., 674; Id., 683; 208 C. 187; Id., 663; Id., 709; 209 C. 544; 210 C. 531; Id., 549; Id., 646; Id., 697; 211 C. 436; Id., 464; Id., 508; Id., 690; 212 C. 157; Id., 415; 213 C. 126; Id., 184; Id., 216; 214 C. 601; 215 C. 49; Id., 517; Id., 616; Id., 701; 216 C. 228; Id., 237; Id., 627; 217 C. 193; 218 C. 335; Id., 729; 219 C. 168; 220 C. 86; Id., 192; Id., 516; 221 C. 217; Id., 422; Id., 482; 222 C. 414; Id., 541; Id., 621; 224 C. 666; 225 C. 13; Id., 297; 226 C. 80; Id., 105; Id., 358; Id., 818; 227 C. 545; Id., 848; 228 C. 271; 229 C. 51; Id., 664; 230 C. 441; 231 C. 391; 232 C. 181; Id., 401; 233 C. 370; 234 C. 424; Id., 624; 235 C. 334; 236 C. 681; Id., 722; 237 C. 272; 238 C. 337; 239 C. 32; Id., 124; Id., 638; 240 C. 1; 241 C. 282. Denial of petition to intervene pursuant to Sec. 22a-19 was not a final decision within meaning of statute because it is not the agency determination in a contested case because, in turn, it does not determine the legal rights, duties or privileges of a party and instead, it is more properly considered as a preliminary or intermediate ruling of the agency. 259 C. 131. Agency decision that is subject to motion for reconsideration is not a final decision from which appeal may be taken even if party appealing decision is not aggrieved by portion of agency decision that is subject of motion for reconsideration. 311 C. 259. Expansive right for any person to seek a declaratory ruling under Sec. 4-176, and subsequent denial of the request, do not confer a right to appeal under this section without pleading sufficient facts to show aggrievement. 312 C. 265.

Cited. 1 CA 1; 2 CA 68; 3 CA 97; Id., 484; Id., 707; 4 CA 143; Id., 216; 5 CA 219; 6 CA 47; Id., 473; 7 CA 748; 12 CA 47; Id., 455; 13 CA 1; Id., 315; Id., 818; 14 CA 413; 17 CA 165; Id., 429; 18 CA 4; Id., 13; Id., 40; Id., 291; 19 CA 360; Id., 428; Id., 713; 21 CA 678; 23 CA 188; Id., 435; 24 CA 44; Id., 163; 25 CA 543; judgment reversed, see 222 C. 541; 27 CA 377; Id., 590; 28 CA 435; Id., 733. Uniform Administrative Procedure Act does not govern commission's actions prior to appeal to Superior Court. 30 CA 85. Cited. Id., 463; Id., 720; Id., 738; 31 CA 155; 32 CA 335; 33 CA 247; Id., 541; Id., 775; 34 CA 123; Id., 567; 35 CA 474; 36 CA 155; 37 CA 423; Id., 653; judgment reversed, see 238 C. 361; Id., 777; 38 CA 506; 41 CA 1; Id., 641; judgment reversed, see 240 C. 824; Id., 827; 42 CA 39; judgment reversed, see 241 C. 310; Id., 519; Id., 631; 44 CA 143; Id., 611; Id., 702; 45 CA 225; Id., 476; Id., 577. Trial court properly dismissed plaintiff's claims for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. 48 CA 102. Damage to professional reputation indirect result of agency hearing and not grounds for immediate judicial appeal. 52 CA 513. Substantial evidence standard is satisfied if the record provides a substantial basis of fact from which the fact in issue can be reasonably inferred; in order to determine whether there was substantial evidence, trier of fact must have conducted a complete and thorough investigation. 57 CA 767. Because commissioner did not give plaintiff opportunity to remedy application's deficiencies or to request that application be deemed complete as submitted and have those deficiencies examined in the forum of a public hearing as required by Sec. 22a-374, plaintiff has met requirements for an appeal from a final decision in a contested case. 71 CA 395. General rule that an administrative agency may and must determine whether it has jurisdiction in particular situation is inapplicable where statutory framework governing appeals from administrative decisions does not afford mechanism for adequate judicial review of psychiatric security review board's decision regarding its own jurisdiction. 105 CA 477. A remand to an agency is not necessarily governed by either Subsec. (h) or (j); the types of remands addressed herein do not constitute an exhaustive list and a remand order more properly characterized as a request for articulation is not within the scope of section. 138 CA 141. Administrative appeals under this section are “actions” that are salvageable under Sec. 52-109 where administrative appeal has been commenced in the name of an improper party due to a mistake. 176 CA 64.

Cited. 30 CS 118. Trial de novo on appeal, discretionary. Id., 262. Cited. Id., 309. Appeal from administrative agency not civil action. Id., 333. Cited. 31 CS 15. Exhaustion requirement was accepted rule before enactment of chapter; Secs. 16-35 and 16-39 are the “other means of review, redress, relief or trial de novo” as contained in Subsec. (a). Id., 65. The time and method for an appeal pursuant to section from an administrative agency are mandatory and jurisdictional. Id., 186. Cited. Id., 212; 32 CS 104. Challenge to regulation should follow statutory procedure, commencing under Sec. 4-176. Court should not grant injunction in lieu of this procedure. Id., 153. Cited. Id., 300. “Failure to exhaust all administrative remedies” applied so as to deprive court of jurisdiction. 33 CS 86. Cited. 34 CS 199; Id., 225; 35 CS 186; 36 CS 1. Court has no authority to enter an interim enforcement order against appellant at appellee's request; sole interim action authorized is stay requested by nonprevailing party at administrative hearing. Id., 285. Common sense and federal case law indicate where record is incomplete for some reason, remand to agency to take additional evidence is only method to insure meaningful judicial review. Id., 297. Cited. Id., 305; 38 CS 460; Id., 712; 39 CS 56; Id., 99; Id., 176; Id., 257; Id., 443; Id., 462; 40 CS 505; Id., 520; Id., 554; 41 CS 267; 42 CS 57; Id., 84; Id., 129; Id., 157; Id., 217; Id., 291; Id., 306; Id., 558; Id., 599; Id., 602; 43 CS 1; Id., 175; Id., 246; Id., 340; Id., 386; Id., 457; 44 CS 21; Id., 223; Id., 230; 45 CS 57.

Subsec. (a):

Cited. 170 C. 668; 171 C. 348. Section is principally addressed to forms of relief which are available after relief has been sought through an agency. 173 C. 352. Cited. 175 C. 415; 177 C. 616; 178 C. 586; 189 C. 550; 191 C. 497. Same reasons that support the prohibition against appeals from interlocutory orders in trial court are equally pertinent in the administrative context. 202 C. 150. Cited. 205 C. 324; 207 C. 346; 208 C. 709; 210 C. 349; 214 C. 560; Id., 726; 224 C. 693; 226 C. 670; Id., 792; 229 C. 31; 233 C. 486; 234 C. 411; Id., 488; Id., 704; 235 C. 128; 237 C. 209; 238 C. 361; 239 C. 599; 240 C. 141; Id., 824; Id., 835; 242 C. 152. Trial court lacked jurisdiction because plaintiff had no statutory right to appeal from board's refusal to hold commutation hearing. 272 C. 647. No explicit language in the environmental protection act that demonstrates the legislature's intent to alter the aggrievement requirement if the appealing party happens to raise an environmental issue; the expansive right to petition for a declaratory ruling under Sec. 4-176 does not confer an automatic right to appeal under this section. 286 C. 698.

Cited. 3 CA 464; Id., 531; 21 CA 629; 33 CA 727; 34 CA 352; 35 CA 111; 41 CA 866; 42 CA 700; judgment reversed, see 240 C. 835. Plaintiff was not aggrieved by final decision because hearing, which was not required by statute, did not constitute a contested case within meaning of statute. 75 CA 215. There is no right to appeal from a disciplinary hearing decision by Department of Correction because such hearings are expressly excluded from the class of contested cases under Sec. 4-166(2) and are not final decisions under Subsec. 115 CA 671. Husband was not aggrieved by wife's placement on child neglect and abuse registry under Sec. 17a-101k despite claim that wife's hyphenated surname included husband's name. 120 CA 376. Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities cannot obtain appellate review of its new claims because commission did not first seek review of them in the Superior Court. 129 CA 714. Section does not provide an applicant for municipal tax relief an avenue of appellate review in the Superior Court. 182 CA 855.

Cited. 38 CS 24.

Subsec. (b):

Cited. 170 C. 3. Statutory right of appeal subject to strict compliance with time limitations. 177 C. 584. Cited. 181 C. 324. Discussion of venue provisions. 186 C. 198. Cited. 188 C. 90. Unnecessary to name and serve a hearing board as a defendant; a hearing board is not an agency for purposes of appeal under UAPA. 198 C. 445. Cited. 201 C. 350; 202 C. 150; 204 C. 60; 205 C. 324. Department of Public Health was a party of record required to be cited and served an appeal in addition to board of examiners in podiatry. Id., 674. Cited. 210 C. 597; 211 C. 78. Court lacked jurisdiction where plaintiffs failed to comply with service requirements. 212 C. 157. Cited. 215 C. 517; 216 C. 667; 217 C. 143.

Cited. 1 CA 1; 3 CA 416. Construction of “agency” as used in statute to mean “hearing officer” would contravene Sec. 4-166(1), consequently service on hearing officer not required. 3 CA 464. Cited. 5 CA 643; 6 CA 148. Time requirement determined by notice containing commissioner's finding of fact, conclusion of law and the order of suspension. 7 CA 748. Cited. 10 CA 14; 14 CA 376; 15 CA 569; 16 CA 604; judgment reversed, see 212 C. 628; 18 CA 132; 21 CA 629; 22 CA 253; 34 CA 18; 35 CA 812; 37 CA 694.

Section requires only that a copy of the appeal be served on parties of record at a Blue Cross rate hearing before the Insurance Commissioner, not that they be made parties; appeals under this section and Sec. 33-167 are heard and decided together. 31 CS 257. Cited. Id., 456; 38 CS 538. Petitions filed must include citations and amendments thereto cannot cure defects in service of process. Id., 712.

Subsec. (c):

Cited. 186 C. 198; 200 C. 489; 204 C. 60; 207 C. 346; 216 C. 667; 217 C. 130; Id., 143; 219 C. 204. Time within which appeals may be filed controlled by provisions in effect when underlying agency proceedings commenced. 221 C. 482. Cited. Id., 922. Subdiv. (1): Service of process pursuant to section does not require a citation; judgment of Appellate Court in 26 CA 938 reversed. 225 C. 13. Failure to meet time limitation for filing appeal deprives trial court of subject matter jurisdiction over appeal. 227 C. 848. Cited. 233 C. 153; 235 C. 128; 237 C. 209; 239 C. 437. Service of process of appeals from administrative agencies is deemed perfected as of the date it is postmarked. 249 C. 503.

Cited. 24 CA 662; judgment reversed, see 223 C. 618; 31 CA 922; 37 CA 653; judgment reversed, see 238 C. 361; 45 CA 620. Service is not completed until the appeal is in possession of the subject agency or the Attorney General's office. 48 CA 711. 45-day filing requirement is a mandatory jurisdictional requirement. 61 CA 270. Service of process by a person who lacked statutory authority did not deprive trial court of subject matter jurisdiction for an administrative appeal when in every other respect service met requirements of statute; court found service requirement of statute to be directory and not mandatory and, in the absence of a showing of prejudice, found service by a person who lacked statutory authority not to be the equivalent of a total failure of service of process. 69 CA 563. Failure of party to file administrative appeal under the UAPA within the 45 days required deprives trial court of subject matter jurisdiction over an appeal; thus, upon landlord's failure to file a timely appeal from Banking Commissioner's order requiring defendant landlord to return a security deposit, commissioner's findings and conclusions became final, binding and not subject to review. 76 CA 824. The only reasonable interpretation of Subsec. is that it lists four alternative time frames during which an appeal of a final decision may be brought, and that, in any given circumstance, only one such time frame will apply. 139 CA 565. Although plaintiff's late service of administrative appeal was claimed to be the result of misinformation received from court clerk, doctrine of equitable tolling could not save appeal from dismissal because 45-day service requirement is jurisdictional in nature and cannot be waived or circumvented for any reason. 141 CA 716. Federal prison mailbox rule inapplicable to Subsec. 149 CA 808. Denial of a petition for reconsideration, and not the mailing date of the final decision, commences the time period for an appeal under Subdiv. (2), as Subdiv. (2) does not contain the “after mailing” language found in Subdivs. (1) and (3). 156 CA 232.

Standards for granting stay. Application of balancing test. 35 CS 13. Singular nature of an appeal from freedom of information grant requires issuance of stay in order to preserve the statutory right of appeal under Sec. 1-21i(d); release of information would render an appeal moot. Id., 186. Cited. 43 CS 10.

Subsec. (d):

Failure of board to follow form prescribed in statute not cause for reversal where conclusion supported by plaintiff's own testimony. 177 C. 344. Cited. 202 C. 453; 217 C. 130; 219 C. 204.

Cited. 34 CA 343; 45 CA 620. A mere showing of untimely service is not grounds for dismissal, and actual prejudicial consequences from failure of service must be shown. 127 CA 170.

Subsec. (e):

Trial court has no power to take any evidence. It may only order evidence, if required, be taken by the agency. 174 C. 271. Cited. Id., 366; 200 C. 489; 201 C. 592; 202 C. 405; 219 C. 204.

Cited. 3 CA 531; 37 CA 653; judgment reversed, see 238 C. 361.

Subsec. (f):

Cited. 172 C. 292; 174 C. 258; Id., 366; 176 C. 82; 177 C. 78; 204 C. 507; 220 C. 307; 223 C. 573; 228 C. 651.

Cited. 3 CA 531; 5 CA 520; 15 CA 569; 18 CA 241; 29 CA 576; 38 CA 168.

It was impermissible for court to, in effect, try the matter de novo when parties inserted new facts at the appellate level. 39 CS 520. Cited. 40 CS 293.

Subsec. (g):

Hearing in which teacher did not have notice of all charges brought against her held in violation of chapter. 167 C. 368. The court cannot substitute its discretion for that legally vested in the commission, but determines on the record whether there is a logical and rational basis for the decision of the commission or whether, in the light of the evidence, it has acted illegally or in abuse of its discretion. 168 C. 294. Cited. Id., 504. Although the commissioner acts in a quasi-judicial capacity, his function is that of an administrative agency and conclusions reached by him are upheld if legally supported by evidence. Id., 587. Scope of judicial review in appeal from administrative agency. 170 C. 327. Cited. 171 C. 348; Id., 349. Evidence is sufficient to sustain agency finding if it affords “a substantial basis of fact for which fact in issue can be reasonably inferred”. Id., 705. Cited. 172 C. 292; 174 C. 366; Id., 529; 175 C. 174; 176 C. 11; Id., 320; Id., 374; 177 C. 78; Id., 344; 179 C. 128. Lay commission acted without substantial evidence and arbitrarily when it relied on its own knowledge and experience concerning technically complex issue of pollution control. 180 C. 421. Cited. 181 C. 69. Decision of commission was affected by an “error of law”; it is for the courts, and not administrative agencies to expound and apply governing principles of law. Id., 324. Cited. Id., 544; 182 C. 314; 196 C. 623; 197 C. 91; 200 C. 1; Id., 133; Id., 145; Id., 489; 202 C. 405; Id., 453; 207 C. 77; 208 C. 442; 210 C. 214; 212 C. 100; 218 C. 580; Id., 757; 222 C. 380; 232 C. 91.

Cited. 4 CA 307; Id., 468; 13 CA 477; judgment reversed, see 210 C. 214; Id., 477; judgment reversed, see 210 C. 214; 15 CA 569; 19 CA 334; Id., 539; 34 CA 352; 35 CA 191; 38 CA 73.

Motion for stay of administrative decision affecting amendment to rate schedules does not operate as authorization for original request. 31 CS 172. Court, on examining record of Blue Cross rate hearing, affirms Insurance Commissioner's modification of rate schedules as there is sufficient evidence to support his judgment. Id., 257. Where the finding of facts and the record did not disclose evidence of sufficient probative force to establish violation of Sec. 14-222, the commissioner's conclusion of law was erroneous. Id., 325. Cited. 35 CS 28; 36 CS 1; Id., 18; Id., 166. Appeal of agency decision permitted. Id., 271. Cited. 40 CS 233; Id., 512.

Subsec. (h):

Cited. 214 C. 505. Proof that one's attorney provided incompetent representation during the course of department proceedings may constitute a showing of a “good reason” for failing to present evidence. 259 C. 288.

Cited re appeal under Sec. 5-248c. 57 CA 767. Remand orders issued pursuant to Subsec. are not final judgments. 138 CA 141.

Subsec. (i):

Cited. 214 C. 505; 218 C. 646; 219 C. 139. Proof of aggrievement requires evidentiary hearing only in absence of a sufficient administrative record; judgment of Appellate Court in 41 CA 641 reversed. 240 C. 824. Cited. 241 C. 310.

Cited. 10 CA 14; 20 CA 474; 43 CA 39; Id., 133.

Subsec. (j):

Cited. 215 C. 590; 216 C. 253; 217 C. 153; 218 C. 580; 219 C. 51; Id., 121; Id., 139; 222 C. 380; 226 C. 704; 228 C. 158; Id., 651; Id., 699; 229 C. 31; 231 C. 328; 232 C. 122; Id., 599; 233 C. 486; 234 C. 312; 235 C. 778; 236 C. 96; Id., 250; 237 C. 209; 239 C. 207; Id., 599; 240 C. 119; Id., 141; 241 C. 310; 242 C. 79; Id., 599. Applies only to remands after rulings on the merits of an administrative appeal. 258 C. 529. Reaffirmed previous holdings that trial court order remanding administrative appeal under UAPA was final decision and further proceedings cannot affect parties' rights. 262 C. 222.

Cited. 20 CA 474; 27 CA 346; 28 CA 262; Id., 500; 29 CA 576; 32 CA 56; Id., 501; Id., 727. Subdiv. (5): Judgment of trial court dismissing appeal is reversed. 34 CA 352, see also 27 CA 614, 226 C. 418. Cited. Id., 510; Id., 620; 35 CA 111; Id., 384; 37 CA 303; Id., 694; 38 CA 322; Id., 506; 41 CA 67; 42 CA 402; 43 CA 133; Id., 636; 44 CA 611; 45 CA 83; Id., 225. It is not the role of the court to substitute its judgment for that of zoning board of appeals in case involving certificate of approval pursuant to Sec. 14-54 when there was substantial evidence on the record to support board's decision. 48 CA 599. Subdiv. (5): Standard of review discussed. 49 CA 513. Substantial evidence rule governing judicial review of administrative fact-finding under Uniform Administrative Procedure Act discussed. 62 CA 45. Section sets forth a substantial evidence rule which governs judicial review of administrative fact-finding. 72 CA 452. A remand issued by a trial court pursuant to Subsec. constitutes a final judgment for the purpose of appeal irrespective of the nature of the remand and administrative proceedings that are expected to follow it. 138 CA 141. Agency decision to discontinue benefits under a medical assistance program was made upon unlawful procedure when plaintiff had relied on an incorrect extension of coverage given by the agency; reliance on the agency extension fell within the parameters of the equitable tolling doctrine. 174 CA 385.

Cited. 42 CS 413. Scope of judicial review. 45 CS 292.

Subsec. (k):

Cited. 234 C. 312; 235 C. 778; 236 C. 96; Id., 250; 237 C. 209.

Cited. 20 CA 474; 24 CA 662; judgment reversed, see 233 C. 618.