Columbus Industrial Bank v. Miller
This text of 7 Conn. Super. Ct. 181 (Columbus Industrial Bank v. Miller) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Superior Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1. The judgment, based upon the memoran' dum of decision dated June 7, 1939, is opened.
In that memorandum of decision no allowance of attorney’s fee was made nor was the interest correctly computed. “Upon discovery of such mistake it was [is] clearly within the power of the court, and its duty... .to make the correction of the obvious error....” Santoro vs. Kleinberger, 115 Conn. 631, 638.
2. The balance of the unpaid principal is $640.
3. The interest was originally deducted and credited to the date of the maturity of the note or contract which existed be' tween the parties.
4. The date of the maturity of the note is fifty (50) weeks after November 21, 1931, which would fix the date of maturity as November 7, 1932.
5. The contract between the parties is expressed in the “note. .. .No. 10,074....”
6. It was there provided “that in the event that this note is not paid at maturity it shall bear interest' from date of ma' turity until paid, at the rate of twelve per centum per annum.”
7. Such an agreement as to interest from the date of maturity is binding and enforceable. Globe Investment Co. vs. Barta, 107 Conn. 276.
8. The plaintiff is entitled to recover interest at the rate of twelve (12) per centum per annum on the unpaid balance of $640 from the date of maturity, November 7, 1932, to the date of this judgment, June 14, 1939, in the amount of $516.03.
9. The plaintiff is also entitled to recover the amount of a reasonable attorney’s fee, under the terms of the decision in 107 Conn. 276, at page 280 (Globe Investment Co. vs. Barta), which, in this case, as distinguished from the cited case, is found to be................................... 150.00.
*183 10. Judgment may be rendered in favor of the plaintiff, as of June 14, 1939, to recover of the defendant:
A — Balance due on principal.................. 640.00
B — Interest, as appears in item 8 of this memorandum ................................ 516.03
C — Attorney’s fee (item 9 of this memorandum) 150.00
Total judgment ............................$1,306.03 and its costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
7 Conn. Super. Ct. 181, 7 Conn. Supp. 181, 1939 Conn. Super. LEXIS 66, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/columbus-industrial-bank-v-miller-connsuperct-1939.