Ozan Lumber Company Changes Ownership

Author

Reads 11K

Unrecognizable male master using electric angle grinder to polish lumber plank while standing at table in professional joinery during work
Credit: pexels.com, Unrecognizable male master using electric angle grinder to polish lumber plank while standing at table in professional joinery during work

The Ozan Lumber Company has undergone a significant change in ownership. The company is now under new management.

This change in ownership is a result of a private sale. Details about the sale are scarce.

The new ownership has brought about a renewed focus on the company's operations. This includes a commitment to improving the company's efficiency and productivity.

Efficiency and productivity are crucial for a lumber company like Ozan, which relies on timely and accurate production to meet customer demands.

Readers also liked: Cvc Capital Partners Ownership

Ozan Lumber Company News

The Ozan Lumber Company was a major player in the forestry industry, with a presence in Arkansas that spanned over several decades. The company's history dates back to the early 20th century, with W.N. Bemis at the helm.

In 1935, W.N. Bemis passed away, leaving his son J.R. as the main shareholder. J.R. Bemis took over the company and expanded its operations, building a new mill in Delight, Arkansas, and acquiring several other mills in the state.

Crop anonymous woodworker drawing with colored chalk on lumber at workbench with carpentry tools
Credit: pexels.com, Crop anonymous woodworker drawing with colored chalk on lumber at workbench with carpentry tools

The company's focus on sustainable forestry practices set it apart from its competitors. By replanting and selective harvesting, the Ozan Lumber Company created thriving forests that would provide timber for generations to come.

Here are some key dates in the company's history:

  • 1935: W.N. Bemis dies, leaving J.R. as the main shareholder.
  • 1936: The mill in Prescott burns.
  • 1937: The Delight mill is completed.
  • 1952: The mill at Delight burns.
  • 1965: The company is sold to Potlatch Corporation.

Bemis Takes Over

After W.N. Bemis' death in 1935, J.R. Bemis took over as the main shareholder of the company.

J.R. Bemis was left to navigate the company's operations, including a significant setback when the mill in Prescott burned down in 1936. The company was already in the process of building a new mill in Delight, Arkansas, but the loss of the operating mill slowed progress.

The Delight mill was completed in January 1937, but behind schedule. J.R. Bemis didn't let this setback hold him back, and he continued to expand the company's operations.

In 1939, the Whelen Springs mill was closed, and J.R. Bemis opened a new mill in Rosboro, Arkansas. This mill would go on to play a crucial role in the company's operations, supplying the Delight mill via the Missouri Pacific Railroad.

Here's a brief timeline of J.R. Bemis' key moves:

  • 1935: J.R. Bemis becomes the main shareholder after W.N. Bemis' death
  • 1936: The Prescott mill burns down
  • 1937: The Delight mill is completed, but behind schedule
  • 1939: The Whelen Springs mill is closed, and a new mill is opened in Rosboro, Arkansas

Union County Nat. Bank Involvement

Industrial lumber processing with workers operating machinery in a factory setting.
Credit: pexels.com, Industrial lumber processing with workers operating machinery in a factory setting.

The Union County Nat. Bank was involved in a significant case with Ozan Lumber Company. The bank was a defendant in the case Ozan Lumber Co. v. Union County Nat. Bank, 207 U.S. 251 (1907).

The bank was sued by Ozan Lumber Company over promissory notes that the lumber company had given in payment for a patented article. The notes did not show that they were given in consideration of a patented machine, as required by the statute of Arkansas.

The case made its way to the Supreme Court, which ultimately ruled in favor of the bank, holding that the act requiring a printed form showing the notes were given in consideration of a patented machine was an illegal discrimination against patented articles.

The bank's involvement in this case highlights the importance of understanding the laws and regulations surrounding patent law and financial transactions.

A different take: Loss Given Default

Bertha Hoeger

Junior Writer

Bertha Hoeger is a versatile writer with a keen interest in financial institutions and community development. Her work primarily focuses on banking and microfinance sectors, providing insightful analyses of various Indian financial entities and organizations. She has covered a range of topics, from banks based in Maharashtra and those established in 2019 to private sector banks and microfinance companies.

Love What You Read? Stay Updated!

Join our community for insights, tips, and more.