Legal Opinion
Bredow v. Woll
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided March 31, 1930PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBanks, J.
This is an action upon a demand note given by the maker, Bohm, to the defendant and by him indorsed to the plaintiff. Upon a former appeal (Bredow v. Woll, 108 Conn. 489, 143 Atl. 849) it appeared from the evidence offered by the plaintiff that on October 17th, 1923, she presented the note for payment to Bohm who told her that he would pay it the following Monday, October 22d; that on that day the plaintiff went to Bohm’s place of business to collect the note, and found that he had left for parts unknown the previous day, and that she thereupon, on the same day, notified the defendant that…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Wood v. GravesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1887
- McGruder v. Bank of WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1824
- Windham Bank v. Norton, Converse & Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1852
- Cadigan v. CrabtreeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1906
- Dennehy v. O'ConnellSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1895
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- State v. ReedSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1978
- Grievance Committee v. DaceySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1966
- Quednau v. LangrishSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1957
- Lancaster v. Bank of New YorkSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1960
- Marko v. Stop & Shop, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1975
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.