7.4 Statutes of Limitations, Releases & Damage Classifications

7.4 Statutes of Limitations, Releases & Damage Classifications

Damage Classifications & Punitive Limits

Adjustment procedures require an adjuster to classify damages correctly, handle represented claimants correctly, draft releases correctly, and — above all — track the applicable statute of limitations correctly, because a missed deadline can convert a defensible claim into a default judgment or, on the flip side, close out a claim's exposure permanently.

Damages fall into three categories. Special damages are the economic, readily calculable losses: medical bills, lost wages, property repair costs, and other out-of-pocket expenses supported by bills, receipts, or wage records. General damages are the non-economic losses — pain and suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, emotional distress — that have no invoice to point to and are instead valued using judgment, comparable claim history, and the severity and duration of the injury. Punitive damages are different in kind: rather than compensating the claimant, they are intended to punish egregious conduct, and Connecticut's common-law rule limits punitive damages in most tort cases to the plaintiff's litigation expenses (including reasonable attorney's fees) less taxable costs — a narrower measure than the multiplier-based punitive awards allowed in many other states. An adjuster evaluating exposure should keep these three categories segregated in the claim file and reserve worksheet, because mixing them produces an unreliable reserve and can mask how much of the exposure is driven by conduct (punitive) rather than injury (general and special).

Key checkpoints:

• Confirm the statutory citation that applies to this claim type.
• Calendar the shortest applicable deadline first.
• Document mailing, notice, or authorization evidence in the claim file.

Represented Parties & Releases

Once a claimant retains counsel, the adjuster's communication channel changes immediately: all substantive contact — requests for records, settlement discussion, recorded statements — must go through the attorney, not the claimant directly, and any prior authorization the claimant gave for direct contact is effectively superseded once representation is on file. Continuing to contact a represented party directly is both a claims-handling and, in some contexts, an ethical problem, and it can taint an otherwise valid settlement or statement. The adjuster should confirm representation in writing, redirect all future communication to counsel, and route any authorization requests (medical, wage, or otherwise) through the attorney's office.

A release is the document that converts a claim payment into a final, binding resolution, and its scope must match what the parties actually intended to settle. A general release extinguishes all claims, known and unknown, arising from the occurrence, while a limited or specific release settles only the claims or damage elements identified in it — for example, a property-damage-only release that leaves a bodily injury claim open. Getting the release type wrong is one of the most common adjuster errors: signing a general release when only property damage was negotiated can extinguish a bodily injury claim the claimant did not intend to give up, while using a limited release when a full settlement was intended can leave the file open to a later claim on the same facts. Two Connecticut-specific pitfalls deserve attention. First, a release signed by or on behalf of a minor generally is not binding without Probate Court approval of the settlement, so a minor's claim cannot be closed with a standard release alone. Second, a release should be dated and executed only after payment terms are certain, because a release that predates a disputed payment amount can itself become a point of contention.

Key checkpoints:

• Confirm the statutory citation that applies to this claim type.
• Calendar the shortest applicable deadline first.
• Document mailing, notice, or authorization evidence in the claim file.

Claim-Type Statutes of Limitations

Statute of limitations tracking is where Connecticut's rules diverge sharply by claim type, and the exam expects the specific citations, not just the general concept.

• Automobile and general negligence claims: § 52-577, Connecticut's general tort statute, sets a three-year period running from the date of the act or omission complained of — not from the date the injury was discovered — making it a statute of repose rather than a pure discovery-based limitation.
• Contractual claims: § 52-576 allows six years for actions on a written contract or one not under seal, while § 52-581 sets a shorter three-year period for actions founded upon an oral contract.
• Personal injury (negligence) claims: § 52-584 sets a two-year period from the date the injury was first sustained or discovered, capped by an outer limit of three years from the date of the act or omission — so an adjuster must calendar both the two-year discovery clock and the three-year outer repose date.
• Strict liability and products liability claims: § 52-577a applies a discovery-based period similar to § 52-584 but layers on a products-specific statute of repose (commonly measured from the date the product was first sold or leased), and § 52-584 continues to apply to the underlying personal injury elements of a products claim, so both citations should appear together on a products file.
• Dram shop claims: § 30-102(a) carries its own short claim-notice and filing clock, separate from and shorter than the general personal injury period, running from the date of the sale to the intoxicated patron — an adjuster who calendars a dram shop file using the ordinary two-year personal injury period rather than the statute's own shorter clock risks mishandling the file's true exposure timeline.
• Claims against a municipality: §§ 7-465 and 7-101a require formal written notice of claim to be given to the municipality within a short statutory window measured in months, not years, well before any lawsuit deadline — this notice requirement is a trap for adjusters and claimants alike because missing it can bar the claim even though the underlying suit-filing deadline has not yet passed.

The practical takeaway for adjusting procedure is that the statute of limitations is not one number to memorize but a lookup keyed to claim type, and several of these statutes layer a discovery-based clock on top of an outer repose date. A disciplined claim file calendars every applicable deadline at intake — the shortest one first — rather than relying on a single generic limitations date, because in Connecticut the wrong statute can be off by years.