EPPLE v. TAYLOR

EPPLE v. TAYLOR
1950 OK 243
223 P.2d 352
203 Okla. 467
Case Number: 34718
Decided: 10/10/1950
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Syllabus

¶0 APPEAL AND ERROR - Dismissal of appeal where question becomes moot.
Where a motion to dismiss is filed upon the ground that the appeal is moot and the court calls for a response to such motion and none is filed, and no excuse offered for such failure this court may, in its discretion, dismiss the appeal.

Appeal from District Court, Pottawatomie County; J. Knox Byrum.

Action for injunction by William F. Eppel et al. against J. O. Taylor et al. From judgment for defendants, plaintiffs appeal. Dismissed.

Reily, Reily, & Spurr, of Shawnee, for plaintiffs in error.

Wyatt, Wyatt, & Edwards, of Shawnee, for defendants in error.

PER CURIAM.

¶1 Plaintiffs commenced an action to enjoin the defendants from the use of a driveway and garage. Judgment was for the defendants and plaintiffs have appealed.

¶2 A motion to dismiss has been filed for the reason that the question presented on the appeal has become moot by reason of a conveyance of the property and that the appeal is for delay only. This court called for a response to the motion to dismiss and none has been filed.

¶3 We have held that the Supreme Court will not attempt to determine abstract, hypothetical, or moot questions, but, where it is made to appear that the questions brought up for review have become moot, the proceedings will be dismissed. Harden v. Morris et al., 198 Okl. 398, 179 P.2d 144; Glass et al., v. Banfield Bros. Packing Co., 168 Okl. 217, 32 P.2d 713; Douglas v. Baker, 167 Okl. 348, 29 P.2d 619; Campbell v. Reynolds, 167 Okl. 365, 29 P.2d 941; State ex rel. Rives, v. Halley, 167 Okl. 504, 30 P.2d 915; Hudson v. Moore, 169 Okl. 12, 35 P.2d 886.

¶4 It being made reasonably to appear that the appeal is moot and should be dismissed it is so ordered.

¶5 Appeal dismissed.

¶6 DAVISON, C. J., ARNOLD, V. C. J., and WELCH, CORN, HALLEY O'NEAL, JJ., concur.