TINKER v. McLAUGHLIN-FARRAR CO.

Annotate this Case

TINKER v. McLAUGHLIN-FARRAR CO.
1911 OK 445
119 P. 238
29 Okla. 758
Case Number: 1691
Decided: 11/14/1911
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

TINKER et al.
v.
McLAUGHLIN-FARRAR CO.

Syllabus

¶0 APPEAL AND ERROR -- Dismissal -- Want of Actual Controversy. Where, pending the appeal, the judgment appealed from is satisfied and released in the court below, the appeal will be dismissed, because it presents only abstract or hypothetical questions for determination, from which no actual relief can follow.

Error from Osage County Court; C. T. Bennett, Judge.

Action between George E. Tinker and others and the McLaughlin-Farrar Company. From the judgment, Tinker and others bring error. Dismissed.

Boone & Macdonald, for plaintiffs in error.
T. J. Leahy and Grinstead, Mason & Scott, for defendant in error.

HAYES, J.

¶1 Defendant in error has filed a motion herein to dismiss this proceeding, because the judgment against the plaintiffs in error in the court below has been settled and released. In support of its motion, it has filed a certified copy of the journal entry in the court below, showing, first, an assignment of the judgment; and, second, that the same has been satisfied and released. The motion to dismiss has been served upon plaintiffs in error, who have made no response thereto.

¶2 It follows that the proceeding should be dismissed, because it presents only abstract or hypothetical questions for determination. Reece v. Chaney et al., 28 Okla. 501, 114 P. 608.

¶3 TURNER, C. J., and DUNN and KANE, JJ., concur; WILLIAMS, J., not participating.