Dutton v. City of Oklahoma City

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Dutton v. City of Oklahoma City

1953 OK 78, 254 P.2d 995, 208 Okla. 208, 1953 Okla. LEXIS 754

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedMarch 17, 1953

Docket35805

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 1953 OK 78 (Dutton v. City of Oklahoma City) 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

Dutton v. City of Oklahoma City, 1953 OK 78, 254 P.2d 995, 208 Okla. 208, 1953 Okla. LEXIS 754 (Okla. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

JOHNSON, V.C.J.

W. A. Dutton commenced an action for injunction against the city of Oklahoma City and another to prohibit the city of Oklahoma City from leasing certain property to Leo Portman.

The plaintiff alleged that he represents himself and those similarly situated; that defendant city of Oklahoma City was about to enter into an illegal lease contract and sought to enjoin the execution of the lease.

A temporary injunction was issued and thereafter a hearing was held at the conclusion of which the court entered a judgment for the defendants. Plaintiff has appealed.

A motion to dismiss has been filed for the reason the judgment of the trial court was not superseded and the court having held that in the absence of an order superseding the judgment the defendant city of Oklahoma City had a right to lease the property; that said lease has been executed and the question on appeal has been rendered moot. The appeal must be dismissed. In Harden v. Morris, 198 Okla. 398, 179 P. 2d 144, we said:

“When the question presented by an appeal has become moot, the appeal will be dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

HALLEY, C.J., and WELCH, CORN, DAVISON, O’NEAL, WILLIAMS, and BLACKBIRD, JJ., concur.

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