Legal Opinion
Doty v. Wheeler
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided January 8, 1936PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtAvery, J.
The plantiffs brought this action to recover upon a promissory note executed by the defendant O. F. Ozley & Co., Inc., as maker and indorsed by the defendants Arthur N. Wheeler and O. F. Ozley. The plaintiffs asked for judgment for the amount due on the note and also to set aside conveyances of real estate .made by the defendant Wheeler to the defendants Cavanagh and Hauslaib, on the ground that the conveyances were fraudulent as against creditors.
At the trial, it was not controverted that the defendants O. F. Ozley & Co., Inc., and Arthur N. Wheeler were liable as maker and indorser, and…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Ford v. H. W. Dubiskie & Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
- Meade v. SmithSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1844
- Middletown Trust Co. v. BregmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1934
- Katz v. RichmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1932
- Bassett v. McKennaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1885
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Secondino v. New Haven Gas Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1960
- Gaudio v. GaudioConnecticut Appellate Court · 1990
- Beers v. Bayliner Marine Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
- McLain v. Taco Bell Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000
- Derderian v. DerderianConnecticut Appellate Court · 1985
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.