This case presents the same facts and the same questions of law that are presented in the case of Kiku Saito v. Policy Holders Life Insurance Assn., this day decided by this court (ante, p. 412 [22 Pac. (2d) 724]), except as to the name of the plaintiff and the dates of the transactions involved; and, for like reasons as in that ease given, the order denying a change of venue is affirmed.

Thompson, J., and Pullen, P. J., concurred.