PEOPLES STATE BANK v. IMPERIAL IRR. DIST. et al.
In denying appellant's petition for rehearing, for the purpose of clarity, we should add that in the decision we stated that [93 P.2d 1015, 1018]: “It also appears from the record that respondents have in fact filed proceedings in the federal court under the Bankruptcy Act, subsequent to the effective date of chapter 72, 1939 Statutes,” etc. In using the word “record” we intended only to refer to respondents' supplemental brief, which directed our attention to this fact, and the record of the statement of counsel for appellant in open court on August 8, 1939, made in the presence of counsel for respondents, which reads in part as follows: “Now I might add that after the demurrer was sustained, after the new consenting statute was adopted, in April of this year, the Imperial Irrigation District did file in bankruptcy, and a trial has been had and the case is not completed *.”
Petition for rehearing denied.