Buonocore v. Raphael De Feo

56 A. 510, 76 Conn. 705, 1903 Conn. LEXIS 110
Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided December 18, 1903·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

The statute (§ 4048) provides that the holder of a satisfied mortgage who neglects to execute a release deed thereof, within thirty days after a wiitten request and a “ tender ” of the necessary expense, shall pay a penalty to any person aggrieved. In the present case it appeared that the plaintiff presented a proper release deed to the defendant for his signature, and also offered to pay any expense he might incur in its execution; but that the defendant refused to execute the deed until he had received f5, which he claimed the plaintiff owed him in another matter.

*706 The Supreme Court in an opinion by Prentice, J., held that under these circumstances the plaintiff was relieved from the actual production and proffer of the money, and stood in the same legal position he would have occupied had a precise and formal “ tender ” in fact been made. Re-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Buonocore v. Raphael De Feo, 56 A. 510, 76 Conn. 705, 1903 Conn. LEXIS 110 (Colo. 1903).

56 A. 510 (Buonocore v. Raphael De Feo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Smith v. GMAC Mortgage Corp.
859 A.2d 981 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2004)
Morequity, Inc. v. Dunn, No. 549371 (Sep. 15, 2000)
2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 11241 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2000)
Mayron's Bake Shops, Inc. v. Arrow Stores, Inc.
176 A.2d 574 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1961)
Knox v. Farmers' State Bank of Merkel
7 S.W.2d 918 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1928)