Stockwell v. McAlvay

California Court of Appeal

Stockwell v. McAlvay

4 P.2d 167, 117 Cal. App. 583, 1931 Cal. App. LEXIS 506

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedOctober 21, 1931

DocketDocket No. 8047.

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 4 P.2d 167 (Stockwell v. McAlvay) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Stockwell v. McAlvay, 4 P.2d 167, 117 Cal. App. 583, 1931 Cal. App. LEXIS 506 (Cal. Ct. App. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

NOURSE, P. J.

Plaintiffs sued for an injunction restraining defendant from voting certain shares of stock of the Consumers’ Salt Company during the pendency of an appeal from the judgment in an action entitled McAlvay v. Consumers’ Salt Co., et al. The appeal in the latter action was finally determined by judgment of the District Court of Appeal entered March 9, 1931, affirming the judgment of the lower court, which confirmed and quieted the title of McAlvay in the stock in issue. (McAlvay v. Consumers’ Salt Co., 112 Cal. App. 383 [297 Pac. 135].) The respondent in the present action now moves that the appeal herein be dismissed upon the ground that all the issues involved herein have become moot because of said decision of the appellate court.

The motion should be granted upon the well-settled rule that when the controversy between the parties is ended the appeal should not be entertained solely for the purpose of entering an academic discussion of the legal questions pre *584 sented. (2 Cal. Jur., p. 749; Foster v. Smith, 115 Cal. 611, 612 [47 Pac. 591]; In the Matter of the Guardianship of Ambrose, 170 Cal. 160, 164 [149 Pac. 43].)

The appeal is dismissed.

Sturtevant, J., and Spence, J., concurred.

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

NOURSE, P. J.

Plaintiffs sued for an injunction restraining defendant from voting certain shares of stock of the Consumers’ Salt Company during the pendency of an appeal from the judgment in an action entitled McAlvay v. Consumers’ Salt Co., et al. The appeal in the latter action was finally determined by judgment of the District Court of Appeal entered March 9, 1931, affirming the judgment of the lower court, which confirmed and quieted the title of McAlvay in the stock in issue. (McAlvay v. Consumers’ Salt Co., 112 Cal. App. 383 [297 Pac. 135].) The respondent in the present action now moves that the appeal herein be dismissed upon the ground that all the issues involved herein have become moot because of said decision of the appellate court.

The motion should be granted upon the well-settled rule that when the controversy between the parties is ended the appeal should not be entertained solely for the purpose of entering an academic discussion of the legal questions pre *584 sented. (2 Cal. Jur., p. 749; Foster v. Smith, 115 Cal. 611, 612 [47 Pac. 591]; In the Matter of the Guardianship of Ambrose, 170 Cal. 160, 164 [149 Pac. 43].)

The appeal is dismissed.

Sturtevant, J., and Spence, J., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 P.2d 167, 117 Cal. App. 583, 1931 Cal. App. LEXIS 506, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stockwell-v-mcalvay-calctapp-1931.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack