Eslick v. Mott

1912 OK 347, 126 P. 230, 38 Okla. 105, 1913 Okla. LEXIS 316
Supreme Court of Oklahoma·Decided May 14, 1912·No. 3246·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

KANE, J.

This cause comes on to be heard upon a motion to dismiss the appeal, supported by affidavit showing that the controversy between the parties has been settled, and that therefore the questions involved have become merely hypothetical. As the affidavit supporting the motion to dismiss is uncontroverted, it must be taken as true, and, under a long line of authorities by this court, the appeal must be dismissed. In the case of Cleveland-Trinidad Paving Company v. Wood, County Treasurer, 29 Okla. 684, 119 Pac. 123, it was held that .“the Supreme Court' will not decide abstract or hypothetical cases, disconnected from the granting of actual relief, or from the determination of which no practical relief can follow.” To the same effect is National Refrigerator & Butchers’ Supply Company v. Elsing, 29 Okla. 334, 116 Pac. 790; Edwards et al. v. Welch, 29 Okla. 335, 116 Pac. 791, and Bryan v. Sullivan, 29 Okla. 686, 119 Pac. 124.

The appeal is dismissed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Eslick v. Mott, 1912 OK 347, 126 P. 230, 38 Okla. 105, 1913 Okla. LEXIS 316 (Okla. 1912).

1912 OK 347 (Eslick v. Mott) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Nichols v. Beardsley
1930 OK 178 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1930)