Is a judge a proper party in a writ of mandate or prohibition?

Preliminarily, it is noted that the petition seeks a writ of mandate directed individually to the judge of the respondent court in addition to a writ directed to the respondent court as such. It is settled that the judge of the court is not a proper party respondent in such a proceeding; and accordingly the demurrer of the respondent judge filed herein is sustained. Gresham v. Superior Court, 44 Cal.App.2d 664, [178 Cal.App.2d 683] 666, 112 P.2d 965; 3 Witkin, California Procedure, 2547, and cases there cited.

The precise question presented herein has previously been fully considered in Laddon v. Superior Court, 167 Cal.App.2d 391, 334 P.2d 638. In said case, writs of mandate or prohibition were sought to compel the trial court to set aside an order overruling the defendant's objections to certain written interrogatories asking defendant (a physician) whether he carried malpractice insurance, and, if so, to state the policy limits. The action pending below therein was one for injuries allegedy resulting from malpractice.