Opinion

Teter v. Board of Ed. of City of Drumright

  • 85 Okla. 16
  • 204 P. 129
  • 1922 OK 31
  • 1922 Okla. LEXIS 14
Court
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Filed
Jan 31, 1922
Status
Published
Author
Kennamer
On the bench
Kennamer, Pitoheord, Johnson, Miller, Elting, Nioholson
Cited by
8 cases
Authority
More cited than 82.0%

The opinion

KENNAMER, J.

This action was instituted by J. L. Teter et al., as plaintiffs, against board of education of city of Drum-right, defendant in error, to enjoin the defendant from locating high school buildings and erecting the same, and from delivering certain bonds of the school district of the city of Drumright for the purchase of school site and erection of school buildings.

The trial court, after a hearing on the petition of the plaintiffs, denied the injunction.

Plaintiffs appealed to the Supreme Court from the judgment of the trial court denying the injunction, but no supersedeas bond was filed •'superseding the judgment of the trial court.

Defendant filed motion to dismiss the appeal of the plaintiffs, and for ground of the motion alleges that the questions presented by this appeal have become moot. That the acts sought to be enjoined by the plaintiffs have long since been fully performed and no judgment can now be entered to effectuate the relief sought by the plaintiffs.

It appears from the affidavit of E. A. Hutchinson, president of the board of education of the city of Drumright, filed in support of the motion to dismiss the appeal, that the board of education in the discharge of its duties sold the bonds in controversy, received the money for the same, purchased the building site, received a conveyance therefor, and erected the school building on the site purchased, that the board has performed the acts which the plaintiffs sought to enjoin.

The motion to dismiss the appeal was filed in this court on January 5, 1922, showing service upon counsel for the plaintiffs in error, and no response has been filed to the motion. The questions in controversy having become moot, the appeal will be dismissed. Parrish v. School District Number 19 et al., 68 Oklahoma, 171 Pac. 461 ; Doctors’ Oil Company v. Adair et al., 83 Okla. 53 , 200 Pac. 858 .

The appeal is dismissed.

PITOHEORD, Y. O. J., and JOHNSON, MILLER, ELTING, and NIOHOLSON, JJ., concur.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.