Curry v. Jockmus

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Curry v. Jockmus

138 A. 809, 106 Conn. 697

DecidedOctober 5, 1927

StatusPublished

This text of 138 A. 809 (Curry v. Jockmus) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Curry v. Jockmus, 138 A. 809, 106 Conn. 697 (Colo. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

Wheeler, C. J.

This ease involves the same questions as its companion case, Tuttle v. Jockmus, ante, p. 683. The only difference is in the acceleration clause which in this case reads, “and if default shall be made in the payment of any one of said notes at the time of its maturity, or of the interest due on said notes.” The defendant does not demur for uncertainty, as in the companion case, “but only because such clause does not appear in the notes.” The opinion in the Tuttle case determines this case.

There is error, the judgment is set aside tod the cause remanded to be proceeded with according to law.

In this opinion the other judges concurred, except Maltbie and Hinman, Js., who dissented.

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

Wheeler, C. J.

This ease involves the same questions as its companion case, Tuttle v. Jockmus, ante, p. 683. The only difference is in the acceleration clause which in this case reads, “and if default shall be made in the payment of any one of said notes at the time of its maturity, or of the interest due on said notes.” The defendant does not demur for uncertainty, as in the companion case, “but only because such clause does not appear in the notes.” The opinion in the Tuttle case determines this case.

There is error, the judgment is set aside tod the cause remanded to be proceeded with according to law.

In this opinion the other judges concurred, except Maltbie and Hinman, Js., who dissented.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

138 A. 809, 106 Conn. 697, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/curry-v-jockmus-conn-1927.