Legal Opinion

Rosa v. Colonial Bank

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided May 17, 1988No. 13196PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtShea, J.

In this action the plaintiff, James Rosa, claims that the defendant, Colonial Bank (Colonial), wrongfully seized the funds he had deposited in a special account with the bank and applied them to payment of a note that he and others had executed as co-makers. The note had been made payable and delivered to the Bank of Trumbull (Trumbull) and, after its maturity, was acquired by Colonial in a merger with Trumbull. A state trial referee, Hon. James P. Doherty, acting as the trial court, held that Colonial was not a holder in due course of the instrument and that the note, therefore, was “subject…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Dreier v. Upjohn Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
  2. Peter T. Ribaudo, Trustee of Visser Plumbing and Heating Co., Inc., Bankrupt v. Citizens National Bank of OrlandoCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1958
  3. Henkin, Inc. v. Berea Bank & Trust Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1978
  4. Marko v. Stop & Shop, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1975
  5. Funding Consultants, Inc. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1982

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Fleet Bank Connecticut, N.A. v. CarilloSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
  2. New Bedford Institution for Savings v. GildroyMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1994
  3. Gemme v. GoldbergConnecticut Appellate Court · 1993
  4. Masotti v. Bristol Savings BankConnecticut Superior Court · 1994
  5. Ginsburg v. Cadle Co.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2001

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API