[Civ. No. 4445. First Appellate District, Division Two.-May 11,

1923.]

GENERAL MOTORS ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION (a Corporation), Respondent, v. JOHN A. PARKER, Appellant.

[1] PLACE OF TRIAL-STIPULATION OF PARTIES.-Order denying motion to change place of trial reversed on authority of General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Codiga, ante, p. 117.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. George H. Cabaniss, Judge. Reversed.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Edward Bickmore and Thos. W. Firby for Appellant.

Haswell & Pierce for Respondent.

STURTEVANT, J.-This is an appeal from an order refusing to change the place of trial. The facts are almost identical with and the case involves no principle except as passed on by this court in General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Codiga, ante, p. 117 [216 Pac. 383]. The case was submitted by stipulation on the briefs filed in that case.

On the authority of the Codiga case the order denying the motion to change the place of trial is reversed.

Nourse, J., and Langdon, P. J., concurred.

[Civ. No. 4420. First Appellate District, Division Two.-May 28, 1923.]

JAMES M. DOON, Appellant, v. EARLE A. WALCOTT et al., Respondents.

[1] MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS-SAN FRANCISCO-CIVIL SERVICE-STRIKING NAMES FROM LISTS.-Judgment affirmed upon authority of Gilbert v. Civil Service Com., 61 Cal. App. 459.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. Walter Perry Johnson, Judge. Affirmed.

The facts are the same as in Gilbert v. Civil Service Com., 61 Cal. App. 459.

William A. Kelly for Appellant.

Geo. Lull, City Attorney, and Maurice T. Dooling, Jr., Assistant City Attorney, for Respondents.

NOURSE, J.-This is an appeal from a judgment denying appellant's petition for a writ of mandate to compel the respondents, constituting the Civil Service Commission of the city and county of San Francisco, to restore his name to a place upon the register of candidates eligible to appointment to the position of general clerk in the classified civil service of the city and county of San Francisco. The appeal is submitted on the record in Gilbert v. Civil Service Com., 61 Cal. App. 459 [215 Pac. 97]. No briefs are filed upon this appeal and therefore nothing new is presented for consideration.

[1] Upon the authority of the Gilbert case the judgment is affirmed.

Sturtevant, J., and Langdon, P. J., concurred.

INDEX.

(799)

INDEX.

ACCOMPLICE. See Criminal Law, 38, 59.

ACCOUNTING. See Partnership, 1-3; Services, 2.

ACCOUNTS. See Corporations, 7, 8.

ADMISSIONS. See Broker's Commissions, 5; Criminal Law, 25, 26,
71.

ADVICE OF COUNSEL. See Constitutional Law, 1, 2.

AGE. See Criminal Law, 44; Juvenile Court Act, 4.

AGENCY.

-

1. SALE OF REAL ESTATE- SECRET PROFITS — UNAUTHORIZED EX-
PENDITURES BY BROKERS.-In this action to recover secret profits,
the defendants, without plaintiff's knowledge, having caused the
title to the property to be vested in their agent under a pur-
ported sale at a given price and thereafter sold the property
at an increased price, but having accounted to plaintiff only
for the lesser amount, after deducting their commission and
the expenses, and there having been no evidence showing any
authority in defendants to make alterations and repairs, they hav-
ing been employed only to negotiate a sale, the trial court properly
refused to credit them with amounts claimed to have been expended
by them in making alterations and repairs or with a commission
on the sale at the increased price.-Rempel v. Kells, 81.

2. UNLAWFUL ACTS INTENT PRESUMPTION.

-

-

- In such action, the

act of the defendants having been unlawful, it is presumed to
have been done with an unlawful intent.-Id.

3. MORTGAGE WRITTEN AUTHORITY.—The authority of an agent to
make any mortgage for his principal (and a trust deed given as
a pledge for the payment of money is in legal effect a mortgage)
must be in writing.-Title G. & T. Co. v. Hammond Lbr. Co., 245.
See Broker's Commissions, 3, 6, 9, 10; Contracts, 8, 18; Cor-
porations, 4, 5; Demand, 1; Guaranty, 2.

ALIEN LAND LAW.

1. CONSPIRACY TO EFFECT TRANSFER OF REAL PROPERTY-PLEADING—
SUFFICIENCY OF INDICTMENT. - An indictment for conspiracy to
62 Cal. App.-51

(801)