Mutual Protective Corporation v. Palatnick
Supreme Court of Connecticut
1Opinion of the CourtHinman, J.
The substituted complaint alleges that the defendant Palatnick borrowed $940 from the plaintiff and signed a note, payable to it or order, for $1000, payable $20 weekly commencing one week after date, and providing that upon default in any payment for one week after due the whole amount shall become due. The defendants Tonken and Goodman indorsed the note before delivery. It is further alleged, in paragraph six, that “Said sum was loaned to the defendant J. Palatnick with no intent other than to receive the amount actually loaned plus interest at the rate of six per cent, per annum, and…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Douglass v. Boulevard Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1917
- Contino v. TurelloSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1924
- Bassett v. FosterSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1932
- Columbus Industrial Bank v. RosenblattSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1930
- Devito v. FrebergSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1919
3Cited by10 opinions
- Atlas Realty Corp. v. HouseSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1937
- Atlas Realty Corporation v. HouseSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1936
- Maresca v. DeMatteoConnecticut Appellate Court · 1986
- Community Credit Union, Inc. v. ConnorsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1954
- Lebowitz v. McPikeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1964
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.