Legal Opinion
Arnold v. Hollister
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided May 5, 1944PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtElls, J.
In 1911 Norman E. Hollister executed a promissory note in the sum of $1640 payable to Isaac N. Hollister on demand with interest at 6 per cent per annum, and as security executed a mortgage on real estate in Glastonbury. Isaac died testate on January 12, 1917, devising to Norman and the latter’s wife, Charlotte, a life use in the note and mortgage with remainder, after the death of the survivor, to their three sons, Josiah, Benjamin and William. On January 9, 1918, Norman conveyed the mortgaged premises to Josiah and Benjamin, who immediately went into possession thereof and were liable for…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Richards v. MacKallSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Sanford v. BulkleySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1862
- Nichols v. NicholsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1907
- Skinner v. HaleSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1903
- Haskell v. BaileySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1852
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Collens v. New Canaan Water Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1967
- City of Bridgeport v. DebekSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
- Lettieri v. American Savings BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
- State v. BletschSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
- Ghent v. Meadowhaven Condominium, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2003
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.