Sager v. Schmidt
| Decision Date | 04 April 1923 |
| Citation | 98 Conn. 736,120 A. 504 |
| Court | Connecticut Supreme Court |
| Parties | SAGER v. SCHMIDT. |
Appeal from Court of Common Pleas, Litchfield County; James P Woodruff, Judge.
Action by Mabelle D. Sager, substituted by Herman B. Sager, against William Schmidt. From a refusal to set aside a judgment as of nonsuit, plaintiff appeals. Error, and cause remanded, with directions.
Where a note given for the balance due on an automobile recited that title was not to pass until the note and interest thereon and all renewals should be paid in full, and that the payee might take possession of the property " at any time if this note is not paid as agreed, or if said property is badly kept, treated, or cared for," the payee was not limited to retaking possession of the property in case of a nonpayment, but was entitled at his election to sue on the promise to pay or retake the property.
Roswell J. Hallenbeck, of Winsted, for appellant.
Samuel A. Herman, of Winsted, and J. Clinton Roraback, of Cannan for appellee.
The note sued on was in the following form:
" $300.00. Maybrook, N. Y., June 25, 1921.
One month after date I promise to pay to the order of Herman Sager three hundred dollars at the First National Bank of Maybrook. This note is given for Bal. on 1916 Elgin touring car motor No. A1205, series 159. It is expressly understood and agreed that the title and ownership of said property does not pass until this note and interest thereon and all renewals of this note shall have been paid in full, and said Herman Sager is the owner of said property until same is paid and said Herman Sager may take possession of said property at any time if this note is not paid as agreed, or if said property is badly kept, treated or cared for. Value received with interest.
Wm Schmidt."
Plaintiff offered evidence to prove the execution, presentment dishonor, and protest of the note. The defenses were: First, general denial; second, that the note was procured by misrepresentation and fraud, with a counterclaim for damages. At the close of the plaintiff's evidence, the defendant moved for judgment as of nonsuit, on the ground that by the terms of the note the plaintiff's only remedy in case of nonpayment was by retaking possession of the property conditionally sold. It was on this ground alone that the nonsuit was granted, and the only reasons of appeal are that the court erred in holding that the plaintiff's only remedy was by retaking the automobile, and that ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Shirley v. State National Bank of Connecticut
...but that under the common law of Connecticut, the right of peaceful repossession without a hearing was recognized.2 See Sager v. Schmidt, 98 Conn. 736, 120 A. 504 (1923); Crompton v. Beach, 62 Conn. 25, 25 A. 446 (1892); Swift's Digest of Laws of Connecticut 376-77, 468-69 (Dutton & Cowdrey......
-
Hartlin v. Cody
...and Pothier v. Reid Air Spring Co., 103 Conn. 380, 387, 130 A. 383, relied upon by the trial court, and cases such as Sager v. Schmidt, 98 Conn. 736, 737, 120 A. 504, and Colonial Finance Co. v. Brodsky, 140 Conn. 391, 394, 100 A.2d 568, relied upon by the plaintiffs, are not Nor are the pl......
-
Boland v. Essex County Bank and Trust Company, Civ. A. No. 72-3299-G
...effected similar changes in the law of Connecticut. There repossession was allowed when specifically contracted for, Sager v. Schmidt, 1923, 98 Conn. 736, 120 A. 504, but plaintiff's counsel in C.A. No. 73-32 represented that a diligent search of Connecticut cases failed to disclose a case ......
- Thompson v. Towle