Story

The pertinent facts as they appear in the brief filed by the appellant, and with which statement of facts “respondents agree”, are as follows:

The ease of Jones v. Frost, 28 Cal. 245 , contains an indication that unless an amended complaint changes “the identity of the action”, no new or additional rights are created by such amended complaint in favor of, or conferred upon, the defendant to move for a change of venue.

In Buell v. Dodge, 57 Cal. 645 , it is said: “Dodge’s right to á change of the place of trial is to be determined by the then conditions of the case, and could not be taken away by statements in an amended complaint subsequently filed.” In Remington S. M. Co. v. Cole, 62 Cal. 311 , it was held that the right to an order by which a motion for change of venue may be granted “is to be determined by the condition of things existing at the time the parties claiming it first appeared in the action”.

After reviewing several authorities, in the case of Brady v. Times-Mirror Co., 106 Cal. 56 [ 39 Pac. 209, 211 ], it was ruled to the same effect as in the case last hereinbefore cited. In part, the court said:

■See, also, Ah Fong v. Sternes, 79 Cal. 30, 33 [ 21 Pac. 381 ] ;…