The defendants are "liable to Colt's for damages for wrongful failure to defend, in an amount to be proven at trial together with pre- and post-judgment interest, costs, attorneys' fees, and any consequential damages arising from [the defendant's] breach, including but not limited to Colt's legal fees and costs, the value of Colt's lost business opportunities, and any and all sums that Colt's may be required to pay in damages in the Gary Lawsuit regardless of policy limits," the complaint said.

"Defendant's actions ... with respect to the unauthorized use of the Travelers Marks have damaged and irreparably injured and, if permitted to continue, will further damage and irreparably injure Travelers, the Travelers Marks, and Travelers' reputation and goodwill associated with the Travelers Marks," the complaint said.

"There simply was no period of time from the plaintiff's hire in 1983 until his retirement in 2016 at which the plaintiff was not a regular member of the Bridgeport Police Department," the court said.

"I think all of tort law should be grounded in the principle that the plaintiff should not be receiving a windfall, and the court is allowing, in this case, a windfall," defense counsel David A. Haught said.

The Workers Compensation Board said the day a now-retired police chief was promoted to police chief constituted a "new hire" date, meaning he was ineligible for benefits under the Heart and Hypertension Act of 1996. The appellate court disagreed.

"The trial court found that the plaintiffs satisfied their burden of establishing ... that the false imprisonment arose out of the defendant's business pursuits, and that the business pursuits exclusion bars coverage," the opinion said.

The Connecticut Supreme Court has decided that three business who undertook "repairs" to prevent the spread of COVID-19 weren't actually "repairs" that would give rise to a covered claim.