Conn. Gen. Stat. § 10-153f
(February, 1965, P.A. 298, S. 5; 1969, P.A. 811, S. 5; P.A. 76-403, S. 6, 11; P.A. 77-614, S. 302, 304, 587, 610; P.A. 78-218, S. 87-91, 212; 78-303, S. 85, 136; P.A. 79-405, S. 1, 2; P.A. 80-483, S. 40, 186; P.A. 83-72, S. 5, 9; 83-342, S. 1, 2; P.A. 84-459, S. 1, 2; P.A. 85-343, S. 3-5; May Sp. Sess. P.A. 86-1, S. 26, 27, 58; P.A. 87-1, S. 4, 7; 87-206, S. 1-3; 87-250, S. 9, 11; P.A. 90-325, S. 22, 23, 32; P.A. 91-352; P.A. 92-84, S. 2, 3, 5 -7; 92-170, S. 22, 23, 26; P.A. 97-177, S. 1, 2; P.A. 98-252, S. 11, 80; P.A. 00-204, S. 9, 13; 00-220, S. 9, 43; P.A. 01-173, S. 17, 18, 67; P.A. 11-125, S. 1; P.A. 16-185, S. 5.)
Cited. 162 Conn. 393. Secs. 10-153 a-10-153j include coverage of teachers employed in summer school programs. 177 Conn. 68. Since plaintiff was not a proper "party to the arbitration", he lacked standing to seek judicial review of the arbitration award. 184 Conn. 116. Cited. 190 Conn. 235; 197 C. 554; 200 Conn. 376; 201 Conn. 685. Arbitration procedure prescribed is limited to negotiations of contracts. 202 Conn. 492. Cited. 205 Conn. 116; 206 Conn. 113; 216 Conn. 253; 217 Conn. 110; 234 Conn. 704; 239 Conn. 32. Arbitration panel established under section is not required to disclose information re arbitration negotiations because the panel is not a public agency for purposes of the Freedom of Information Act. 314 C. 802. Cited. 5 Conn.App. 253; 23 Conn.App. 727; 35 Conn.App. 111. Cited. 27 Conn.Supp. 298. Arbitrators selected under statute are all to be impartial; former school board chairman and personal friend of superintendent of schools cannot serve as impartial member of board. Id., 421. Cited. 30 Conn.Supp. 63; 38 Conn.Supp. 80. Subsec. (c): Cited. 238 Conn. 183. Subdiv. (7) required arbitration review panel to take second look at the evidence in light of the same statutory criteria that arbitration panel or single arbitrator is required to consider which is the essence of a de novo standard of review and the legislative history of statute supports conclusion that review panel properly conducted a de novo review of arbitration panel's award. 259 C. 5. Arbitration award was final, even though it had not been presented to Waterbury board of alderman for review and possible rejection and award was sufficiently specific to satisfy section's finality requirement; judicial review of arbitrators' decision under Teacher Act must be by motion to modify or vacate, filed in Superior Court within 30 days following receipt of final decision; provisions of Teacher Act remain unaffected except to the extent they conflict with S.A. 01-1, which prevails over Teacher Act; S.A. 01-1 reduced 30-day time limit for filing motion to vacate to 15 days; plaintiff was required to file a motion to vacate in order to challenge award. 276 C. 355.
See Sec. 10-153k re applicability of this section to incorporated or endowed high schools or academies.