The San Francisco call., 1908-04-02
RUFF BLOCKED
IN FIGHT TO
DELAY TRIAL
Court of Appeal Denies Writ
TO Prevent DooIing's
Proceeding
Charges of Prejudice Refuted
and Application for a
Transfer Rejected
San Benito Jurist Also Refuses
TO Encumber Record as TO
immunity Contract

Incidents Yesterday which contributed
10 the fHaI defeat of Ruef's eIab-
orafe plans for avoiding trial by
causfne indefinite delays:
The court of appeal refused the writ
Of prohibition sought by Buef's attor-
neSs 10 prevent Judge DooIing from
proceeding with the trial
Judges Dunno and DoOIing filed afi-
davfts denying the charge of bias made
ing denied the motion for transfer of
sac case TO some other Judge.
Judge DoOIing refused 10 allow Ruef's
attorneys TO eDcumber the record with
"a mass of testimony concerning the
iHnsous Immunity contract and declared
shat nc would NOT consiGer thc contract
unless IL Nva~ shown 10 him that the
document bore a definite legal status.
Abe Ruef practically reached the end
OF his halter Yesterday. He was posi-
urely and finally discredited at every
turn in the effort which he and his at
torneys are making to avoid q trial, and
his last hope OF further delay was ban
ished. The court OF appeal refused to
consider his application to restrain
Judge Dooling from proceeding with his
trial, and Judge Dooling himself denied
me motion 10 have the case transferred
from his department to another
H.is. no BLOCK TRIAL
Though a single point has been left
epcn 10 Ruefs attorneys for argument
.lls morning. their effort 10 block prog
less is hopeless task and the actual
,.nlpeueImcnt OF jury viii probably be
snder way within y hours.
The quietus put upon Ruef was q
most cnecsual one and evidently uneN-
pected. Had the appellate court granted
an order citing the prosecution to show
cause why a writ Of prohibition di-
rected against Judge DooIing should
not issue. a delay of al least month
would have followed. even though the
court might have refused Ruefs motion
the next day after the order was made
This is because the law provides that
90 DAYS must elapse before remittitur
can be handed down, and that during
This time the supreme court has the
right. if it sees 1T. to review the action
OF the court Of appeal The refusal Of
the appellate court to issue such an or
der. however. makes the action final
ana leaves Ruef without an appeal.
i,uers attorneys had counted upon the
delay Of so days. and the action Of the
appellate court yesterday left them
wildly
PETITION PROMPTLY DENIED
The decision OF the court. which was
handed down shortly after noon, is as
follows.
Abraham Ruef VS.. Judge Frank H.
Dunne-By the Court: This is a peti-
zion for a writ to prohibit the Hon. NJ.
r. Dooling from proceeding 20 try pc
fitiouer upon an indictment pending
against him in the superior court OF
the city and county OF San Francisco.
The facts set forth IN the petition
bring the case clearly within the rules
lsid down in Upton VS.. Upton (s4 Cal,
2s). Although this case has been criti-
cised in subsequent cases IL has not
been overruled. and this court is bound
BY its authority. and for this reason
the petition is denied"
PREJUDICE Is DENIED
Judge Dooling himself denied the
motion made before him for a transfer
Of the case after two interesting ses-
slons in his court, at the first OF which
he fled his personal affidavit, denying
the bias and prejudice alleged by Ruef-
An afidavit by Judge Dunno, also deny
ing that ne bore prejudice TO disqualify
hIrn from sitting at the Ruef trial, was
i.4ed at the same time Ach was ready
with a string OF objections as soon as
Heney had finished reading the affida-
Wits, and made several motions to strike
cut portions OF Judge Dunne's affidavit.
als Of which were denied. Ach followed
tAis with a request for permission TO
cross examine Judge Dunno, which elic-
ted ihe information from Heney that
Judge Dunno had left the city for a
vacation trip
= did not know that ne had left the
t4A-s Se@C . oN6C 4DcoAA8s WISH nc
mad not gone without making an order
for the payment Of my expenses"
OBJECTIONS THROWN OUT
The case was adjourned until after
noon, when the defense was ready with
objections to portions OF Judge Dool-
ing's affidavit. which met the same
fate as those directed against Judge
0unne's deposition With no other
avenue OF attack open. Ruefs attor-
neys agreed 10 submit the questions
involved without argument. and Judge
centipued On PsEe :, Cel.n.