Legal Opinion
Davis v. Maislen
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided March 21, 1933PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHaines, J.
The finding is that the defendants Maislen, Kupperstein and Hoffson were all real-estate dealers, and Kupperstein was also a builder, and all were experienced in real estate and mortgage matters and often operated together in real-estate deals and were frequently together at the office of Maislen. The plaintiff had been employed for many years by Maislen, Hoffson and the Maison Company, and had full confidence in Maislen and was easily influenced by him in financial matters. Maislen and Hoffson were brothers-in-law and the son of Kupperstein was the son-in-law of Maislen, while Hoffson and…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Hoxie v. Home InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1864
- McCleave v. John J. Flanagan Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1932
- Haugh v. KirschSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
- Gardner v. PrestonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1805
- Edwards v. WarnerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1869
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Carpenter v. Planning & Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1979
- Guerriero v. GalassoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1957
- State v. LenihanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1964
- Williams v. MaislenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1933
- Obuchowski v. Dental CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1962
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.