HOLMES et al. v. BANK OF AMERICA NAT. TRUST & SAVINGS ASS'N et al.*
The facts in this case are similar to those set forth in Fox-Woodson Lumber Co. v. Bank of America, 51 P.(2d) 1149, our decision in which was filed on this date, except that in this case the participation certificate was issued directly to the plaintiff who furnished Holmes disappearing beds for the apartment hotel. In other words, the plaintiff Holmes was the holder of an original certificate, whereas the plaintiffs in the other cases were assignees of the original holders of certificates; the bank having upon surrender to it of the original certificates issued and delivered to such plaintiffs equivalent certificates in exchange. Both the plaintiff and the defendant claim advantages in their favor arising out of this circumstance, but under the view of the law which we have expressed in the Fox-Woodson Lumber Co. Case, supra, the circumstance is immaterial. The reasons for our decision are fully stated in the case last named.
CRAIL, Presiding Justice.
We concur: WOOD, J.; McCOMB, Justice pro tem.