WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HJ 86

RESOLUTION VACATING THE DECISION OF THE CLAIMS COMMISSIONER TO DISMISS THE CLAIM AGAINST THE STATE OF MELISSA STEINHILPER, ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF AMANDA MONINGTON AND REMANDING THE CLAIM TO THE CLAIMS COMMISSIONER FOR A HEARING ON THE MERITS.

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Heather Somers

Vacates the prior dismissal and remands the claim to the Claims Commissioner for a merits hearing, restoring the claimant’s right to pursue the estate’s claim against the State.

ON CONSENT CALENDAR /IN CONCURRENCE
#claimsagainstthestate-individualsnamed
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HJ 86

Summary — HJ 86 (2025)

Title: Resolution vacating the decision of the Claims Commissioner to dismiss the claim against the State of Melissa Steinhilper, administratrix of the estate of Amanda Monington, and remanding the claim to the Claims Commissioner for a hearing on the merits

Purpose / Intent

HJ 86 directs that a prior administrative dismissal by the Connecticut Claims Commissioner of a claim brought by Melissa Steinhilper (as administratrix of the estate of Amanda Monington) be vacated and that the claim be returned to the Claims Commissioner for a full hearing on the merits. The resolution restores the claim to active status so substantive adjudication or disposition may occur.

Key provisions and changes

  • Vacates the Claims Commissioner’s decision that previously dismissed the named claim.
  • Remands the specified claim back to the Claims Commissioner.
  • Directs the Claims Commissioner to conduct a hearing on the merits of the claim (i.e., an evidentiary/substantive proceeding rather than leaving the matter dismissed administratively).

Note: The text provided is a resolution directing administrative action; it does not itself determine liability or award relief.

Who is affected

  • Claimant: Melissa Steinhilper, in her capacity as administratrix of the estate of Amanda Monington — the claimant’s ability to pursue the underlying claim is restored.
  • State of Connecticut: as the respondent to the claim; state agencies or employees implicated in the original claim may be involved in the merits hearing and any subsequent settlement or award.
  • Connecticut taxpayers/payers of judgments: potential exposure to liability or settlement if the claim is later sustained.
  • Claims Commissioner’s office: required to rehear and adjudicate the matter on the merits.

Procedural and timeline notes

  • Introduced: March 18, 2025; referred to the Joint Committee on the Judiciary.
  • Public hearing held: March 28, 2025.
  • Filed with LCO: April 11, 2025; reported out and favorably recommended for calendar placement April 28, 2025 (House Calendar No. 495; File No. 790).
  • House adopted the resolution: May 19, 2025.
  • Senate favorable report and calendar placement: May 20, 2025 (Senate Calendar No. 523).
  • Senate adopted the resolution on consent/in concurrence: June 4, 2025 (status: ON CONSENT CALENDAR / IN CONCURRENCE).
  • Referred to Office of Legislative Research and Office of Fiscal Analysis: April 21, 2025 (for informational/analytical purposes).

Likely impact

  • Procedurally reopens the claim for substantive review; timing of a new hearing will depend on scheduling by the Claims Commissioner.
  • Could lead to settlement or award against the state depending on hearing outcome; any fiscal exposure will depend on the merits and any resulting disposition.
  • Does not itself adjudicate liability or authorize payment — it restores the claimant’s procedural right to a merits hearing before the Claims Commissioner.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.