the mere fulfilling of one Ralph Lauren Outlet of the conditions thereof and not a consideration for an extension.Ed. Note.For other cases see Bills and Notes Cent Dig. Dec. Dig. S.Appeal from Circuit Court Pennington County; Levi McUee Judge.Action by Charles M. Wilcox against the McCain Land & Live Stock Company and others sureties. Judgment North Face Outlet for defendant sureties new trial denied and plaintiff appeals. Nike Max Air 90 Judgment and order reversed.Walter G. Miser and Buell & Denu all of Rapid City for appellant. Williams & Sweet of Rapid City for respondents.WHITING J. Defendants were all sued as makers of a certain promissory note. Execution of the note by the corporation as maker was conceded but such other defendants as appeared answered that they executed such note as sureties that plaintiff knew the capacity in which they executed such note and that they were released from any liability upon such note by plaintiff without their knowledge or consent granting to the maker an extension of time for payment of such note. Verdict and Judgment were for these alleged sureties. This appeal is from such Judgment and an order denying Nike Free Run a new trial.But few matters require our attention and these rest on legal propositions so plain and fundamental that no citation of authorities or extended discussion Is necessary or warranted. If there ever was any agreement Polo Ralph Lauren Outlet for extension of time of payment It is conceded that the sole evidence thereof is to be found in certain writings. The note was given Marchbut bore interest Nike Argentina atper cent per annum from JanuaryIt was due SeptemberThe note was procured by plaintiff through an agent. In the North Face Outlet Store correspondence that led up to the giving and receiving of this note it appears that the maker or makers of the note desired to give a longtime note but that plaintiff would not take such a note but did state that he would take a note for six or eight months with privilege of renewal.On Januarythe corporation defendant through one of its officers advised plaintiff that:If you agree in your receipt to grant a renewalwe willexecute a note eight months time atper cent.Under date of Januaryplaintiff executed a receipt to be delivered upon delivery of the note and which was so delivered. This receipt among other things recited:The note given may be renewed providing the interest is paid in full and the McCain Land & Live Stock Company are solvent at time of The North Face Outlet Store renewal.It is this receipt that constitutes the agreement for extension which the answering defendants contend released them from liability. A renewalof a note Is the giving off a new note in the place of the former one and a contract for Nike Max Air renewalcontemplates a new note to which the parties are the same. Plaintiff could not under his receipt have been required to have accepted a note as a renewal Ralph Lauren Outlet Online note except under the conditions named in such receipt and then Polo Outlet Online only in case such note offered as a renewal was executed by all those who executed the first note. An agreement for a renewalis not an agreement for an extension. There Nike Shop Is no pretense that there ever was any other agreement oral or written for an extension. But it apparently is the theory of respondents that The North Face Outlet it was extension and not renewal that was contemplated by