Bd. of Com'rs of Cleveland v. Stogner, Clerk of Court

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Bd. of Com'rs of Cleveland v. Stogner, Clerk of Court

1916 OK 558, 157 P. 923, 57 Okla. 709, 1916 Okla. LEXIS 580

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedMay 16, 1916

Docket7526

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 1916 OK 558 (Bd. of Com'rs of Cleveland v. Stogner, Clerk of Court) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bd. of Com'rs of Cleveland v. Stogner, Clerk of Court, 1916 OK 558, 157 P. 923, 57 Okla. 709, 1916 Okla. LEXIS 580 (Okla. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

Op'nion by

BLEAKMORE, C.

This is an original proceeding commenced in this court by the filing of a *710 petition seeking a writ of mandamus to compel Jim Stog-ner, court clerk of Cleveland county, Okla., to certify and file, as required by law, a transcript of the record in a certain cause then pending in the county court of Cleveland county, Okla., wherein the board of county commissioners of said county was plaintiff, and the Oklahoma Sanitarium Company (now the State Hospital) was defendant, in order that plaintiff therein might appeal said cause to this court. Alternative writ of mandamus issued, returnable July 19, 1915, of which return was made in due time. Thereafter, without further order of this court, respondent certified and filed the transcript in said cause, and an appeal from the judgment therein has been perfected.

It is apparent that this cause now presents only hypothetical questions, a determination of which could not result in the granting of any actual relief, further than the awarding of costs. In McCullough et al. v. Gilcrease, 40 Okla. 741, 141 Pac. 5, it is held:

“Abstract or hypothetical cases, d'sconnected from the granting of actual relief, or from the determination of which no particular result can follow other than the awarding of the costs of the appeal, will not be decided by this court.”

It follows that this proceeding should be dismissed.

By the Court: It is so ordered.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Op'nion by

BLEAKMORE, C.

This is an original proceeding commenced in this court by the filing of a *710 petition seeking a writ of mandamus to compel Jim Stog-ner, court clerk of Cleveland county, Okla., to certify and file, as required by law, a transcript of the record in a certain cause then pending in the county court of Cleveland county, Okla., wherein the board of county commissioners of said county was plaintiff, and the Oklahoma Sanitarium Company (now the State Hospital) was defendant, in order that plaintiff therein might appeal said cause to this court. Alternative writ of mandamus issued, returnable July 19, 1915, of which return was made in due time. Thereafter, without further order of this court, respondent certified and filed the transcript in said cause, and an appeal from the judgment therein has been perfected.

It is apparent that this cause now presents only hypothetical questions, a determination of which could not result in the granting of any actual relief, further than the awarding of costs. In McCullough et al. v. Gilcrease, 40 Okla. 741, 141 Pac. 5, it is held:

“Abstract or hypothetical cases, d'sconnected from the granting of actual relief, or from the determination of which no particular result can follow other than the awarding of the costs of the appeal, will not be decided by this court.”

It follows that this proceeding should be dismissed.

By the Court: It is so ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1916 OK 558, 157 P. 923, 57 Okla. 709, 1916 Okla. LEXIS 580, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bd-of-comrs-of-cleveland-v-stogner-clerk-of-court-okla-1916.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack