Legal & controls
Item 3 and Item 9A as filed · every verdict is the registrant’s own sentence, printed below it · a filing that fails an extraction gate reads “not extracted”
| Fiscal year | Filed | Item 3 | ICFR | disclosure controls | material weakness | Filing |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-12-31 | 2026-02-20 | described here | effective | effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · Legal Proceedings For a discussion regarding The Hartford’s legal proceedings, see the information contained under “Litigation” including “Run-off Asbestos and Environmental Claims” in Note 14 - Commitments and Contingencies of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Part II - Item 5. Market for the Hartford's Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities Item 9A · ICFR · Based on this assessment under those criteria, The Hartford's management concluded that its internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2025. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Controls and Procedures Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures The Company's principal executive officer and its principal financial officer, based on their evaluation of the Company's disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(e)) have concluded that the Company's disclosure controls and procedures are effective for the purposes set forth in the definition thereof in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(e) as of December 31, 2025. | ||||||
| 2024-12-31 | 2025-02-21 | described here | effective | effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · LEGAL PROCEEDINGS For a discussion regarding The Hartford’s legal proceedings, see the information contained under “Litigation” including “Run-off Asbestos and Environmental Claims” in Note 14 - Commitments and Contingencies of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. | Part II - Item 5.Market for the Hartford's Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities Item 9A · ICFR · Based on this assessment under those criteria, The Hartford's management concluded that its internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2024. Item 9A · disclosure controls · CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES EVALUATION OF DISCLOSURE CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES The Company's principal executive officer and its principal financial officer, based on their evaluation of the Company's disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(e)) have concluded that the Company's disclosure controls and procedures are effective for the purposes set forth in the definition thereof in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(e) as of December 31, 2024. | ||||||
| 2023-12-31 | 2024-02-23 | described here | effective | effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · LEGAL PROCEEDINGS For a discussion regarding The Hartford’s legal proceedings, see the information contained under “Litigation,” including “COVID-19 Pandemic Business Income Insurance Litigation ” and “Run-off Asbestos and Environmental Claims,” in Note 15 - Commitments and Contingencies of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. | Part II - Item 5.Market for the Hartford's Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities Item 9A · ICFR · Based on this assessment under those criteria, The Hartford's management concluded that its internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2023. Item 9A · disclosure controls · CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES EVALUATION OF DISCLOSURE CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES The Company's principal executive officer and its principal financial officer, based on their evaluation of the Company's disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(e)) have concluded that the Company's disclosure controls and procedures are effective for the purposes set forth in the definition thereof in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(e) as of December 31, 2023. | ||||||
| 2022-12-31 | 2023-02-24 | described here | not extracted | — | — | EDGAR |
Item 3 · LEGAL PROCEEDINGS For a discussion regarding The Hartford’s legal proceedings, see the information contained under “Litigation,” including “COVID-19 Pandemic Business Income Insurance Litigation ” and “Run-off Asbestos and Environmental Claims,” in Note 14 - Commitments and Contingencies of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. | Part II - Item 5.Market for the Hartford's Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities | ||||||
| 2021-12-31 | 2022-02-18 | described here | not extracted | — | — | EDGAR |
Item 3 · LEGAL PROCEEDINGS For a discussion regarding The Hartford’s legal proceedings, see the information contained under “Litigation,” including “COVID-19 Pandemic Business Income Insurance Litigation ” and “Run-off Asbestos and Environmental Claims,” in Note 15 - Commitments and Contingencies of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. | Part II - Item 5.Market for the Hartford's Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities | ||||||
5 of 5 annual reports on record have their filing text cached on this host; the rest are listed with their EDGAR link and no extraction, because this surface never fetches from SEC on a page load.
- Item 3 and Item 9A are located in the filing HTML already cached on this host and read with the same line-anchored item matcher and largest-gap body disambiguation the filing-narrative pass uses for Item 1A and Item 7 — no fetch, no model, no summarization.
- A heading is accepted as a section only when it is not a table-of-contents row (a trailing page number), not a quoted reference in prose, and names its own section; the span must then clear a per-item length band and carry readable text after the heading. Anything that fails a gate is served as 'not extracted' with the reason — never as a default value.
- An effectiveness conclusion is read only from a sentence that names its own control set (disclosure controls and procedures, or internal control over financial reporting) and states an outcome. Conditional sentences — the standard limitations paragraph and forward-looking remediation language — are excluded, because they are hypotheses rather than conclusions.
- When a filing's own sentences disagree — an effective conclusion beside an unremediated material-weakness disclosure, or two conclusions of opposite sign — no verdict is asserted. A wrong 'controls were effective' reading is worse than no reading.
- Every verdict is shown beside the verbatim sentence it was read from. The excerpt is the filing's own words, capped at 1,200 characters; the filing itself is one link away.