Legal Opinion

Katz & Mullen Co. v. Lesnow

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided June 1, 1931Published

1Per curiam

The plaintiff, holding second mortgages on two parcels of land, had been foreclosed out by proceedings instituted by the first mortgagee, and brought this action to recover the amount due upon the notes which he held, from the defendants, subsequent owners of the land who in their deed had assumed and agreed to pay the mortgage indebtedness. One of the defendants, Lesnow, upon whom the obligation of the assumption had come to rest, caused the appellant Munson to be cited in as a defendant and filed a cross-complaint against him in which he alleged that Munson, a grantee of the premises…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Banks v. WarnerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1912
  2. Carrano v. HuttSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1918
  3. White v. TaylorSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1917

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

Powered by the Exa API