Legal Opinion
MacArthur v. Cannon
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided January 27, 1967No. File No. CV 13-6506-2276PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtKinmonth, J.
This action was brought by one comaker of a note against the other comaker for contribution of one-half of the face value of the *210note. The defendant in his answer admitted the note and set up by way of special defense that he received no part of the proceeds of the note and was an accommodation maker. The court found the issues for the plaintiff, and the defendant has appealed, assigning error in the court’s refusal to correct the finding and in that the conclusions are not supported by the facts found.
*211The finding may be summarized as follows: On July 3, 1962, the plaintiff and the defendant…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Fidelity & Casualty Insurance v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1938
- Trenchard v. TrenchardSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1954
- Winestine v. Rose Cloak & Suit Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1919
- Bruce v. McElhannonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1954
- Hewitt v. SanbornSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1925
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Wescott v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1979
- Riegler v. RieglerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1968
- Swift v. LevesqueDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1985
- Stockwell v. Bloomfield State BankIndiana Court of Appeals · 1977
- Cranfill v. Union Planters Bank, N.A.Court of Appeals of Arkansas · 2004
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.