Conn. Gen. Stat. § 51-243
(1949 Rev., S. 7911; 1953, S. 3163d; March, 1958, P.A. 27, S. 40; 1959, P.A. 28, S. 211; 1969, P.A. 518; 1971, P.A. 40, S. 3; P.A. 73-576, S. 2, 4; P.A. 74-183, S. 56, 291; P.A. 76-336, S. 17; 76-436, S. 106, 681; P.A. 77-452, S. 20, 72; P.A. 80-313, S. 56; P.A. 82-248, S. 130; 82-307, S. 4, 8; P.A. 93-176, S. 2; P.A. 01-152, S. 2; P.A. 12-133, S. 16.)
Cited. 144 C. 295; 182 C. 419; 186 Conn. 632; 187 C. 73; 191 C. 62. Single party has no legal entitlement to multiple sets of challenges when distinct causes of action have been consolidated; the granting of more challenges than provided by law is subject to review for abuse of discretion; in conducting appellate review, court must consider whether granting the challenges harmed either party or was inconsistent with an efficient and orderly judicial process. 268 C. 244. Cited. 17 CA 121; 25 CA 702; 42 Conn.App. 542. Cited. 41 Conn.Supp. 48. Juror excused from trial in process because of stress and strain resulting from his check problems held valid compliance with statute. 6 Conn. Cir. Ct. 439. Subsec. (a): Jury obtained by a party who exercises peremptory challenges not required by law is not a biased jury, but, by allowing such party to exclude jurors suspected of bias or partiality, is a fair and impartial jury. 279 C. 622. Subsec. does not allow court to grant additional peremptory challenges to only one side in a civil case. 84 Conn.App. 656.
See Sec. 54-82h re alternate jurors in criminal prosecutions.