AN ACT CONCERNING RECOVERY OF ATTORNEYS' FEES UNDER THE STATE CODE OF ETHICS.
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when HB 5376 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on HB 5376.
You're tracking HB 5376
We'll email you the moment it moves.
HB 5376 — AN ACT CONCERNING RECOVERY OF ATTORNEYS' FEES UNDER THE STATE CODE OF ETHICS.
Last action — No Action
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
2In Committee
-
3Passed House
-
4Passed Senate
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2022 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.
Bill Text
What changed in the latest version
58 added · 7 removed58 line(s) added, 7 removed.
House of Representatives General Assembly SubstituteFile Bill No.
5376494 February Session, 2022 ANSubstitute ACTHouse CONCERNINGBill RECOVERYNo. OF ATTORNEYS' FEES UNDER THE STATE CODE OF ETHICS.
5376 House of Representatives, April 14, 2022 The Committee on Government Administration and Elections reported through REP.
FOX of the 148th Dist., Chairperson of the Committee on the part of the House, that the substitute bill ought to pass.
AN ACT CONCERNING RECOVERY OF ATTORNEYS' FEES UNDER THE STATE CODE OF ETHICS.
(c) [If a judge trial referee finds, after a hearing pursuant to this section, that there is no probable cause to believe that a public official or state employee has violated a provision of this part, section 1-101bb or section 1-101nn, or if the board determines that a public official or state employee has not violated any such provision, or if a court of competent jurisdiction overturns a finding by the board of a violation by such a respondent,]respondent] If (1) after a hearing pursuant to this section, the board determines that a matter was brought without any substantial justification, or (2) upon a subsequent appeal of the board's decision, a court of competent jurisdiction determines that a matter was brought withoutsHB5376 any/ substantialFile justification,No. the state shall pay the reasonable legal expenses of therespondent as determined by the Attorney General or by the court, if appropriate.
If494 any1 complaintsHB5376 broughtFile under the provisions of this part, section 1-101bb or section 1-101nn is made with theknowledgethatitismadewithoutfoundationinfact,therespondent shall have a cause of action against the complainant for double the amount of damage caused thereby and, if the respondent prevails in LCO \\PRDFS1\HCOUSERS\BARRYJN\WS\2022HB-05376-R011 of 2 HB.docx Substitute Bill No.
5376494 suchwithout action,any thesubstantial respondentjustification, maythe bestate awardedshall bypay the courtreasonable thelegal costsexpenses of suchtherespondent actionas togetherdetermined withby reasonablethe attorneys'Attorney fees.General or by the court, if appropriate.
If any complaint brought under the provisions of this part, section 1-101bb or section 1-101nn is made with theknowledgethatitismadewithoutfoundationinfact,therespondent shall have a cause of action against the complainant for double the amount of damage caused thereby and, if the respondent prevails in such action, the respondent may be awarded by the court the costs of such action together with reasonable attorneys' fees.
-LCO LCOsHB5376 R01-HB.docx/ }OUSERS\BARRYJN\WS\2022HB-05376-File 2No. of 2
494 2 sHB5376 File No.
494 The following Fiscal Impact Statement and Bill Analysis are prepared for the benefit of the members of the General Assembly, solely for purposes of information, summarization and explanation and do not represent the intent of the General Assembly or either chamber thereof for any purpose.
In general, fiscal impacts are based upon a variety of informational sources, including the analyst’s professional knowledge.
Whenever applicable, agency data is consulted as part of the analysis, however final products do not necessarily reflect an assessment from any specific department.
OFA Fiscal Note State Impact:
Agency Affected Fund-Effect FY 23 $ FY 24 $ Comptroller - Adjudicated GF - Potential See Below See Below Claims Account Savings Note:
GF=General Fund Municipal Impact:
None Explanation This bill narrows the circumstances under which the state must pay reasonable attorneys' fees in proceedings brought against public officials or state employees under the code of ethics.
Current law does not limit the amount of attorneys' fees that the state is liable for;
thus, capping attorneys' fees may result in potential savings to the state.
The Out Years The annualized ongoing fiscal impact identified above would continue into the future subject to inflation.
sHB5376 / File No.
494 3 sHB5376 File No.
494 OLR Bill Analysis HB 5376 AN ACT CONCERNING RECOVERY OF ATTORNEYS' FEES UNDER THE STATE CODE OF ETHICS.
SUMMARY This bill narrows the circumstances under which the state must pay reasonable attorneys’ fees in proceedings brought against public officials or state employees under the ethics code.
Under the bill, the state must pay these fees if the matter was brought without substantial justification, as determined by (1) the Citizen’s Ethics Advisory Board (CEAB) after a hearing or (2) a court handling an appeal of the board’s decision.
Under current law, the state must pay reasonable attorneys’ fees for respondents if (1) a judge trial referee finds, after a hearing, that there was no probable cause of an ethics code violation;
(2) CEAB determines that there was no code violation;
or (3) a court overturns the board’s finding of a violation.
EFFECTIVE DATE:
October 1, 2022 COMMITTEE ACTION Government Administration and Elections Committee Joint Favorable Yea 19 Nay 0 (03/29/2022) sHB5376 / File No.
494 4
Action History
-
No Action
-
REF. BY HOUSE TO COMMITTEE ON Judiciary
-
FILE NO. 494
-
HOUSE CALENDAR NUMBER 348
-
FAV. RPT., TABLED FOR HOUSE CALENDAR
-
RPTD. OUT OF LCO
-
REFERRED TO Office of Legislative Research AND Office of Fiscal Analysis 04/13/22
-
FILED WITH LCO
-
Joint Favorable
-
PUBLIC HEARING 0311
-
REF. TO JOINT COMM. ON Government Administration and Elections
Sponsors
- Government Administration And Elections Committee · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 186 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- Government Administration And Elections Committee
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (186)
186 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 186 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- Who sponsors HB 5376?
- HB 5376 is sponsored by Government Administration And Elections Committee.
- What is the current status of HB 5376?
- This bill died with 2022 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
- Where can I track HB 5376?
- Track HB 5376 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on HB 5376
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of HB 5376
Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →