Conniff v. Conniff & Clouet, Inc.

Connecticut Superior Court

Conniff v. Conniff & Clouet, Inc.

4 Conn. Super. Ct. 404, 4 Conn. Supp. 404, 1937 Conn. Super. LEXIS 7

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedJanuary 28, 1937

DocketFile #50581

StatusPublished

This text of 4 Conn. Super. Ct. 404 (Conniff v. Conniff & Clouet, Inc.) 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.

Bluebook

Conniff v. Conniff & Clouet, Inc., 4 Conn. Super. Ct. 404, 4 Conn. Supp. 404, 1937 Conn. Super. LEXIS 7 (Colo. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

SIMPSON, J.

Upon the stipulated facts it appears that in taking into possession the refrigerator sold to Santillo and subsequently selling it to Abrams, the Conniff & Clouet, Inc., was acting as agent of the United Illuminating Company and in its behalf. In view of these facts the Illuminating Com.' pany could have required the Conniff 6? Clouet, Inc., to corn vey equitable ownership to the refrigerator to it. The Re' ceiver stands in no better position than Conniff 6? Clouet. This was not done, but the conditional bill of sale assigned by the Conniff 6? Clouet, Inc., to the C. I. T. Corporation with the knowledge and consent of the Illuminating Company and the C. I. T. Corporation notified of that fact. In doing *405 what it did, it appears therefore that at all times the Conniff & Clouet, Inc., was acting as the agent of the Illuminating Company. This beinlg so, had the Conniff & Clouet, Inc., received the $160. from the C. I. T. Corporation it would have received it as agent and would have had as agent to account to the Illuminating Company and had it so received and retained the $160. it would have been the creditor of the Illuminating Company. But the Conniff 6? Clouet, Inc., did not receive the $160. and thereby became a creditor of the Illuminating Company. The Receiver when it received the $160. was not receiving it as a sum that belonged to Conniff 6? Clouet, Inc. The receiver, therefore, received a sum not belonging to the Conniff 6? Clouet, Inc., and forming a part of its assets.

The judgment of the Court is therefore that Illuminating Company never having become a creditor of Conniff 6? Clouet, Inc., the receiver has acquired no title to the $160. and that he should turn it over to the Illuminating Company.

It is so ordered.

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

SIMPSON, J.

Upon the stipulated facts it appears that in taking into possession the refrigerator sold to Santillo and subsequently selling it to Abrams, the Conniff & Clouet, Inc., was acting as agent of the United Illuminating Company and in its behalf. In view of these facts the Illuminating Com.' pany could have required the Conniff 6? Clouet, Inc., to corn vey equitable ownership to the refrigerator to it. The Re' ceiver stands in no better position than Conniff 6? Clouet. This was not done, but the conditional bill of sale assigned by the Conniff 6? Clouet, Inc., to the C. I. T. Corporation with the knowledge and consent of the Illuminating Company and the C. I. T. Corporation notified of that fact. In doing *405 what it did, it appears therefore that at all times the Conniff & Clouet, Inc., was acting as the agent of the Illuminating Company. This beinlg so, had the Conniff & Clouet, Inc., received the $160. from the C. I. T. Corporation it would have received it as agent and would have had as agent to account to the Illuminating Company and had it so received and retained the $160. it would have been the creditor of the Illuminating Company. But the Conniff 6? Clouet, Inc., did not receive the $160. and thereby became a creditor of the Illuminating Company. The Receiver when it received the $160. was not receiving it as a sum that belonged to Conniff 6? Clouet, Inc. The receiver, therefore, received a sum not belonging to the Conniff 6? Clouet, Inc., and forming a part of its assets.

The judgment of the Court is therefore that Illuminating Company never having become a creditor of Conniff 6? Clouet, Inc., the receiver has acquired no title to the $160. and that he should turn it over to the Illuminating Company.

It is so ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 Conn. Super. Ct. 404, 4 Conn. Supp. 404, 1937 Conn. Super. LEXIS 7, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/conniff-v-conniff-clouet-inc-connsuperct-1937.