Case Name: BENJAMIN FRANKLIN BOND & INDEMNITY CORPORATION (a Corporation), Petitioner, v. RUBEN S. SCHMIDT, Judge of the Superior Court, etc., et al., Respondents
Court: District Court of Appeal of the State of California
Jurisdiction: California
Decision Date: 1933-05-16
Citations: 132 Cal. App. 39
Docket Number: Civ. No. 8881
Parties: BENJAMIN FRANKLIN BOND & INDEMNITY CORPORATION (a Corporation), Petitioner, v. RUBEN S. SCHMIDT, Judge of the Superior Court, etc., et al., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: California Appellate Reports
Volume: 132
Pages: 39–40

Head Matter:
[Civ. No. 8881.
Second Appellate District, Division Two.
May 16, 1933.]
BENJAMIN FRANKLIN BOND & INDEMNITY CORPORATION (a Corporation), Petitioner, v. RUBEN S. SCHMIDT, Judge of the Superior Court, etc., et al., Respondents.
F. E. Davis, Edw. Y. Jones and Milton H. Silverberg for Petitioner.
Everett W. Mattoon, County Counsel, S. Y. 0. Prichard, Deputy County Counsel, and Frank L. Guerena for Respondents.

Opinion:
WORKS, P. J.
The writ of review was improperly issued in this proceeding. After return made to the writ our attention is first called in the briefs to the fact that the petition for the writ was unverified. The writ of review can be issued only upon a verified petition. (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 1069.)
As we have so often said under similar circumstances, respondent judge is not a proper party to the proceeding.
The writ and the accompanying restraining order are set aside and the proceeding is dismissed.
Stephens, J., and Parker, J., fro tern., concurred.