Hood v. McCarthy

91 N.E. 501, 174 Ind. 128, 1910 Ind. LEXIS 84
Indiana Supreme Court·Decided April 8, 1910·No. No. 21,645·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Montgomery, J.

The Board of Commissioners of the County of Miami, on September 3, 1907, overruled appellants’ remonstrance, and granted appellee a license to retail intoxicating liquors for one year. An appeal was taken to the Miami Circuit Court, and, on application, the venue was changed to the Cass Circuit Court, in which a demurrer was sustained to appellants’ amended remonstrance. Appellants declined to amend, and on December 19, 1907, final judgment was rendered in favor of appellee. It is alleged on appeal that the court erred in sustaining appellee’s demurrer to appellants’ remonstrance.

It is manifest that the time for which the license was granted to appellee has long since expired, and the subject-matter of the litigation has ceased to exist. The question submitted is no longer a matter of actual controversy, but merely an abstract or mooted one. This court will not determine such questions, and the appeal must accordingly be dismissed. Brown v. Dicus (1909), 172 Ind. 51; Hale v. Berg (1908), 41 Ind. App. 48.

■yhe appeal is dismissed.

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

Hood v. McCarthy, 91 N.E. 501, 174 Ind. 128, 1910 Ind. LEXIS 84 (Ind. 1910).

91 N.E. 501 (Hood v. McCarthy) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gary Amusement Co. v. Hirsth
198 N.E. 298 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1935)
Ballew v. Arnett
129 N.E. 18 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1920)
Leavell v. Doney
104 N.E. 856 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1914)
Meyer v. Farmers State Bank
103 N.E. 97 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1913)
Gibson v. State
99 N.E. 424 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1912)