New Britain herald., 1915-12-22
WELlNSkY GETS LITTLE
 SYMPATHY FROM JUDGE
Theodore Stanley Secures Judgment for $2,33O in
 Superior court.

1 Hartford, Dec. 22-Characterizing
 the defendants testimony as a clever attempt to escape responsibility for
 an endorsement and the case of one 1 with which he had listened to with
 little sympathy, Judge Joseph P. Tut
 tie rendered judgment immediately
 at the conclusion of the arguments ] in the care of Theodore A. Stanley. proprietor of Cedar Hill farm against I Samuel Welinsky, the action being
 to recover $2,00O and interest on a
 note, which the plaintiff had been obliged to meet because of the fail I ure of the signers. Judgment with l interest totaled $2,33O.3O.
 1 Judge J. E. Cooper appeared for 1 MT. Stanley and Klett & filling for the defendant.
 MT. Stanley testified that on Octo- Der 23,19f2, M. D. Stanley and Sam
 uel Welinsky. Representing M. D. Stanley, Inc. came to him at Cedar Hill farm and represented to him that they needed $2,0OO in their business and could obtain it from Fannie La vine, provided they could get him to indorse the note. MT. Stanley said
 he objected, saying he understood
 when the firm was established they
 had money enough to do business.
 Finally after considerable persuasion
 by Welinsky, he indorsed the note
 as an accommodation, the under
 standing being that he would not Do called upon to meet 1t.
 The following April the note went
 to protest at the New Britain Trust
 company. Attorney M. D. Saxe, rep
 resenting Fannie Lavine, called upon
 MT. Stanley to pay it. He put it up to Welinsky who had also indorsed
 the note. Welinsky said he couldn't Stanley Pays $500.
 The matter was fixed up April 30,
 MT. Stanley giving a check for $500 to MT. Saxe for his client. A new note for $1,5OO for thirty days was issued to care for the balance Like the original, it was endorsed by M D. Stanley, T. A. Stanley, Samuel Welin- sky and Fannie Lavine. The note
 and other notes and checks were is-
 sued later in the year to care for the
 original obligation and the witness
 met all the payments.
 M. D. Stanley testified that the
 original note was obtained at the in-
 stance of his partner, Welinsky, all though he accompanied him to Cedar Hill farm when T. A. Stan1ey's en- | dorsement was secured. Before the note came due the partnership was l dissolved.
 When Welinsky went to get the money from MissMLavine she kept out 1 $400 with interest the former owed l her on a personal matter. He brought l back less than 1,60O and the bal ance was charged to Welinsky on the company's books. Welinsky, the wit I ness testified, said he was not respon- sible for the note as his endorsement l followed T. A. Stanley's. That was the first intimation MT. Stanley had 1 that it mattered where a name on l note appeared and he went to Miss l Lavine and told her to accept no more 1 notes from Welinsky unless the lat ter's name appeared on the back. 1 The defendant took the witness 1 stand and testified that he was a l partner in the business of M. D. l Stanley, Inc, when the note for l $2,OO0 was drawn. M. D. Stanley as l president of the company said they
 needed money and asked him where
 he could get some. He suggested
 Fannie Lavine and went to her. She
 asked for another endorser and M.
 D. Stanley offered to get his brothers 1 signature. This was done, but the | following January the partnership was dissolved, the witness selling out.
 linen then scratched his name off the
 pack or the original note. He en-
 dorsed later notes purely as an ac- i commodation to T. A. Stanley.