Legal Opinion

Colonial Plan Company v. Tartaglione

Supreme Court of Rhode Island

Decided December 2, 1929PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarrows, J.

This case is here on exceptions of plaintiff taken at the close of testimony to action of the court (1) directing a verdict for defendant and (2) refusing to direct a verdict for plaintiff.

The facts are undisputed. The action was based on a promissory note for three hundred dollars given for a loan which came within the terms of “An act to regulate the business of making small loans.” Pub. Laws, 1923, Ch. 427.

Plaintiff, admittedly, was licensed to take the note in question which was dated August 23, 1924, and was signed by the three defendants. A pass book was given to defendant Tartaglione…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Capital Loan & Savings Co. v. BieryOhio Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Ryan v. Motor Credit Co., Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1941
  3. NV One, LLC v. Potomac Realty Capital, LLCSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 2014
  4. Household Finance Corp. v. Swartz (In Re Swartz)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Rhode Island · 1984
  5. Boyajian v. Union Capital Corp. (In re Harrington)District Court, D. Rhode Island · 1980

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

Powered by the Exa API