From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McCullough et al. v. Gilcrease

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
May 26, 1914
141 P. 5 (Okla. 1914)

Opinion

No. 3725

Opinion Filed May 26, 1914.

APPEAL AND ERROR — Dismissal — Hypothetical Question. Abstract or hypothetical cases, disconnected from the granting of actual relief, or from the determination of which no particular result can follow other than the awarding of the costs of the appeal, will not be decided by this court.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Error from District Court, Tulsa County; L. M. Poe, Judge.

Action between G. R. McCullough and others and Thomas Gilcrease. From the judgment, the parties first named bring error. Dismissed.

Stuart, Cruce Gilbert and Martin, Bush Murray, for plaintiffs in error.

Biddison Campbell and Preston C. West, for defendant in error.


This cause comes on to be heard upon a motion to dismiss in support of which there is an uncontradicted showing to the effect that the appeal in this cause now involves only a moot question of law, and that no good purpose can now be served by hearing or proceeding further with the appeal herein. Upon the showing made the appeal must be dismissed. It has many times been held that:

"Abstract or hypothetical cases, disconnected from the granting of actual relief, or from the determination of which no particular result can follow other than the awarding of the costs of the appeal, will not be decided by this court." ( Bryan v. Sullivan, 29 Okla. 686, 119 P. 124.)

The motion to dismiss is therefore sustained.

All the Justices concur.


Summaries of

McCullough et al. v. Gilcrease

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
May 26, 1914
141 P. 5 (Okla. 1914)
Case details for

McCullough et al. v. Gilcrease

Case Details

Full title:McCULLOUGH et al. v. GILCREASE

Court:Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Date published: May 26, 1914

Citations

141 P. 5 (Okla. 1914)
141 P. 5

Citing Cases

Wood, Mayor v. Morrisett

It is therefore apparent that the only matters to be determined are abstract and hypothetical questions and…

Taylor v. Long-Bell Lumber Co.

The appeal in this case, therefore, involves only a moot question of law; and the motion to dismiss is…