Legal Opinion

Campbell River Timber Co. v. Vierhus

District Court, W.D. Washington

Decided May 9, 1936No. 8385Published

1Opinion of the CourtCushman, District Judge

(after stating the facts as above).

The question presented is one of law. The plaintiff contends that, while the change made by the agreement (Exhibit A attached to the complaint) amounted to an extension of the maturity date of the bonds, it was not the renewal contemplated by the statute.

The demurrer will be sustained. Sheldon v. Mississippi Cottonseed Products Co. (C.C.A.) 81 F.(2d) 169, certiorari denied Mississippi Cottonseed Products Co. v. Sheldon, Collector, etc., 297 U.S. 721, 56 S.Ct. 599, 80 L.Ed. 1005, March 16, 1936.

*401 As shown in the foregoing case, the word “renewal” may be given…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Cole v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1935
  2. Sheldon v. Mississippi Cottonseed Products Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1936

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

Powered by the Exa API