In Re Whipple

Upon January 10th certain creditors of one Whipple filed a petition asking that he be adjudged an insolvent debtor. It was asserted therein that Baily was one of the creditors, and as such creditor he made affidavit to the petition. Thereafter, January 14th, for reasons not apparent in the record, a second petition was filed, and a demurrer to this petition being sustained, an amended petition thereto was filed, and thereupon issue was joined and a trial had. Upon January 12th the claim of Baily was paid. The trial court acted upon the theory that the second and third petitions were amended petitions, or attempted amended petitions, of the first petition, and we will so consider them. In the first amended petition W.C. Furrey Company appears as a creditor, and that petition is verified by their agent, James W. Hellman. The Furrey Company did not appear as a creditor in the first petition, and, treating the second *Page 427 petition as an amended petition, we are clear that the Furrey Company was not authorized to verify the same as a creditor. (Matter of Visalia Water Co., 119 Cal. 562 ; Anderson v. Superior Court, 122 Cal. 216 .) While we do not hold that an amended petition…