Legal Opinion
Gruber v. Klein
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided February 5, 1925PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, C. J.
General Statutes, §4387, being §29 of the Negotiable Instruments Law, provides: “An accommodation party is one who has signed the instrument as maker, drawer, acceptor, or indorser, without receiving value therefor, and for the purpose of lending his name to some other person.” Klein signed the note upon which the plaintiff, the payee of the note, brings this action, as an indorser. “Without receiving value,” as used in this section, means without receiving value for the note, and not without receiving any consideration for lending his name. Morris County Brick Co. v. Austin, 79 N. J. L. 273,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Contino v. TurelloSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1924
- Baggish v. OffengandSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1922
- Morris County Brick Co. v. AustinSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1910
- Stamford Extract Manufacturing Co. v. Stamford Rolling Mills Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1924
- McGhee Investment Co. v. KirsherSupreme Court of Colorado · 1922
3Cited by12 opinions
- Connecticut National Bank v. VoogSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- Gianetti v. Norwalk HospitalSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
- Blakeslee v. Board of Water CommissionersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
- Thermoglaze, Inc. v. Morningside Gardens Co.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1991
- Brian Construction & Development Co. v. BrighentiSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1978
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.