Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

76 Conn. 705

56 A 510

Buonocore v. Raphael De Feo

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided December 18, 1903

Supreme Court of Connecticut · decided 1903-12-18

Action to recover the statutory penalty for neglecting to execute and deliver a release deed of a satisfied mortgage, brought by appeal from a justice of the peace to the Court of Common Pleas in Hartford County and tried to the court, Coats, J. ; facts found and judgment rendered for the plaintiff, and appeal by the defendant.. Opinion filed with the cleric of the Court of Common Pleas in Hartford County.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

No error · Decided 1903-12-18

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently July 2004

8 state decisions

4019031910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1 The statute (§ 4048) provides that the holder of a satisfied mortgage who neglects to execute a release deed thereof, within thirty days after a wiitten request and a “ tender ” of the necessary expense, shall pay a penalty to any person aggrieved. In the present case it appeared that the plaintiff presented a proper release deed to the defendant for his signature, and also offered to pay any expense he might incur in its execution; but that the defendant refused to execute the deed until he had received f5, which he claimed the plaintiff owed him in another matter.

¶2*706 The Supreme Court in an opinion by Prentice, J., held that under these circumstances the plaintiff was relieved from the actual production and proffer of the money, and stood in the same legal position he would have occupied had a precise and formal “ tender ” in fact been made. Re-

/76/conn/705 · .json · Public domain