Rinaldo

On motion of respondents, under Rule V, subdivision 3, of the Buies for the Supreme Court and District Courts of Appeal, for an order dismissing appeal or affirming the judgment.

This is the second appeal arising out of this proceeding. On the former appeal ( 123 Cal. App. 712 [ 12 Pac. (2d) 32 ]), it was decided that the petition for the writ of prohibition did not state facts sufficient to authorize the issuance of the writ, and therefore that the demurrer to the petition should have been sustained. By that decision it was determined that the complaint on which the Board of Medical Examiners was proceeding against Binaldo stated facts which, assuming the truth of the allegations, would authorize the board to cancel the license of said Binaldo to practice medicine and surgery within the state of California.

The judgment thus having been reversed, the petitioner was by the superior court permitted to file an amended and supplemental petition, to which respondents demurred and the demurrer was sustained. Thereafter, in due course, judgment was entered denying the application for peremptory writ of prohibition. The present appeal is from this last judgment.

The contention by…