Opinion
January, 1916.
Action upon the submission dismissed, without costs, for want of jurisdiction. Held: 1. On the facts agreed to by the parties the case is not one in which plaintiff could have maintained an action, and, therefore, does not come within the provisions of section 1279 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 2. The supplementary statement in the form of the stipulation of the counsel is unauthorized, and cannot be the basis of a judgment under section 1279 of the Code of Civil Procedure. All concurred.