Legal Opinion
Schenectady Discount Corp. v. Matt
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided June 26, 1964No. File No. CV 13-624-694PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the CourtJacobs, J.
The plaintiff corporation instituted this action to recover the reasonable value of the use and occupation of a mobile home or trailer acquired by it through an assignment.
The facts do not require extended discussion. On July 24, 1961, Mobile Homes of New England, of Warehouse Point, Connecticut, and the defendants, of Willimantic, Connecticut, entered into a retail instalment contract by the terms of which Mobile Homes sold to the defendants a new 1961 “Skyline” *639mobile home. The time balance, including various charges, amounted to $9015.72, payable in eighty-three equal monthly instalments…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Aull Savings Bank v. Aull's AdministratorSupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
- Chapel-High Corp. v. CavallaroSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1954
- Carpenter v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1873
- Martino v. Grace-New Haven Community HospitalSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1959
- Richmond & Lexington Turnpike Road Co. v. RogersCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1870
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Sisisky v. Enfield Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1968