Home/Supreme Court of Connecticut/State Trading Corp. v. Rosen

State Trading Corp. v. Rosen

9 A.2d 289, 126 Conn. 37, 1939 Conn. LEXIS 238
CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut
DecidedNovember 8, 1939
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 9 A.2d 289 (State Trading Corp. v. Rosen) 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
State Trading Corp. v. Rosen, 9 A.2d 289, 126 Conn. 37, 1939 Conn. LEXIS 238 (Colo. 1939).

Opinion

Avery, J.

This action was brought by the indorsee of a trade acceptance against the maker. The facts *38 were stipulated between the parties, and it was agreed that if the instrument was negotiable the plaintiff was to be regarded as a bona fide holder for value and entitled to recover. If the instrument was not negotiable, judgment should be entered in favor of the defendant. The instrument was in the following form:

“No. Api. 11, 1938.
To Carroll Cut Rate (H. D. Rosen)
Milford, Conn.
ZIPsy5sHMLrSErzDjwLnCxnzg7RyRIv

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

Related

Eastern Service Centers, Inc. v. Cloverland Farms Dairy, Inc.
744 A.2d 63 (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 2000)
State Trading Corp. v. Jordan
22 A.2d 30 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1941)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
9 A.2d 289, 126 Conn. 37, 1939 Conn. LEXIS 238, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-trading-corp-v-rosen-conn-1939.