ELLA TAYLOR, Appellant, v. CHARLES RAYMOND HOWE, AMOS A. BETTS, WILLIAM M. COX, LOREN VAUGHN, JOHN CUMMARD, WILSON T. WRIGHT, PACIFIC INDEMNITY COMPANY, a Corporation, MASSACHUSETTS BONDING AND INSURANCE COMPANY, a Corporation, FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND, a Corporation, AMERICAN SURETY COMPANY, a Corporation, GLOBE INDEMNITY COMPANY, a Corporation, and THE FIDELITY AND CASUALTY COMPANY OF NEW YORK, a Corporation, Appellees

[Civil No. 4221. Filed November 18, 1940.] [107 Pac. (2d) 203.] ELLA TAYLOR, Appellant, v. CHARLES RAYMOND HOWE, AMOS A. BETTS, WILLIAM M. COX, LOREN VAUGHN, JOHN CUMMARD, WILSON T. WRIGHT, PACIFIC INDEMNITY COMPANY, a Corporation, MASSACHUSETTS BONDING AND INSURANCE COMPANY, a Corporation, FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND, a Corporation, AMERICAN SURETY COMPANY, a Corporation, GLOBE INDEMNITY COMPANY, a Corporation, and THE FIDELITY AND CASUALTY COMPANY OF NEW YORK, a Corporation, Appellees. Messrs. Struckmeyer & Flynn and Mr. H. S. McCluskey, for Appellant. Messrs. Baker & Whitney and Mr. Lawrence L. Howe, for Appellees William M. Cox, Charles Raymond Howe, Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland and Pacific Indemnity Company. Messrs. Silverthorne & Silverthorne, for Appellee Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland. Messrs. Rawlins & Rawlins and Mr. Arthur M. Davis, for Appellees John Cummard and Globe Indemnity Company. Messrs. Townsend, Jenckes & Wildman, for Appellees Loren Vaughn and American Surety Company. Mr. Riney B. Salmon, for Appellees Wilson T. Wright and Fidelity and Casualty Company of New York. Mr. Forrest A. Betts of Los Angeles, California, and Mr. Henderson Stockton, for Appellees Amos A. Betts and Massachusetts Bonding and Insurance Company and Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland. Mr. Joe Conway, Attorney General, and Mr. Charles Bernstein, Assistant Attorney General, for Appellees Amos A. Betts, William M. Cox, Charles Raymond Howe, Loren L. Vaughn, John Cummard and Wilson T. Wright. [MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.] PER CURIAM. It was stipulated between counsel that the decision in Alice I. Bankhead, Appellant, v. Charles Raymond Howe et al., Appellees, ante, p. 257, 107 Pac. (2d) 198, would govern the decision in this case also. For this reason, the judgment is affirmed. ROSS, C. J., and LOCKWOOD and McALISTER, JJ., concur.