Legal Opinion · Dissent

David v. Robert Dollar Co.

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided December 15, 1924No. 4291Published

1DissentBourquin, District Judge

If the answer involved no more than the alleged oral agreement for loan and payment out of rents to accumulate, I would concur. Bor defendant carefully pleads the whole as an entire and nonseverable contract, of which the oral part was voluntarily omitted from the written memorandum, apparently complete on its face; and so the latter is conclusively presumed to contain all terms of the contract, is the contract, and is not to be affected by parol.

In addition to eases cited in the majority opinion, see Sund v. Co., 86 Or. 289, 168 P. 303. In respect to the notes, there is a clear distinction…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Board of Com'rs v. Keene Five-Cents Sav. BankCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1901
  2. Sund & Co. v. Flagg & Standifer Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1917
  3. Williams v. Island City Milling Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1894
  4. Wallace v. BaisleyOregon Supreme Court · 1892
  5. Colvin v. GoffOregon Supreme Court · 1916

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API