TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Martin v. Gwinnup

MARTIN v. GWINNUP Et Al.

Martin v. Gwinnup, 1912 OK 468, 124 P. 1092
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Oklahoma · State Highest Courts
Decided
June 25, 1912
Docket
No. 1771
Judges
Robertson
Citations
124 P. 10921912 OK 46834 Okla. 1601912 Okla. LEXIS 371
Disposition
Dismissed.
Syllabus
APPEAL AND ERROR — Questions Determined — Moot Questions. Abstract or moot questions, disconnected from the granting of actual relief, or from the determination of which no practical result, can follow, will not be determined by this court. (Syllabus by Robertson, 0.)
Summary
Error from District Court', Muskogee County; John H. King, Judge. Action by F. L. Martin against Harry G. Gwinnup and James L. Allen for a new trial. Judgment,for defendants, and plaintiff brings error.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Robertson

Opinion by ROBERTSON, C.

On March 10, 1909, a judgment was entered in the district court of Muskogee county in favor of Harry G. Gwinnup and James L. Allen, and against J. F. Griffins, James Robinette, W. A. Crosby, T. F. Crosby, F. L. Martin, and C. W. Turner, for the recovery of the possession of certain real estate, and damages for its wrongful detention. A motion for new trial was filed by the defendants and overruled by the court. A demand for a second trial, under the provisions of section 4792, Wilson’s Rev. & Ann. St. 1903, was made by the defendants, and a second trial was granted by the court by virtue of the provisions of said' statute. From this order of the court, granting a second trial, the plaintiffs appealed to this court, the cause being number 1,488, entitled Harry G. Gwinnup et al. v. J. P. Griffins et al., ante, and which appeal was dismissed by this court on May 14, 1912, on account of defect of parties. On De *161 cember 23, 1909, F. L. Martin, the plaintiff in-error, and who was one of the defendants in the cause below, filed his petition to vacate and modify the judgment and order of the court entered on March 10, 1909, on the grounds of newly discovered evidence, etc. The plaintiffs below, defendants in error herein, interposed a demurrer to the petition which was sustained by the court, and Martin, the plaintiff in error, elected to stand on his petition, and refused to plead further, whereupon the court entered an -order dismissing his petition, from which order he brings this appeal. By reason of the dismissal of the appeal in cause number 1,488 on May 14, 1912, a new trial will result in the district court, as originally ordered by the judge thereof; it therefore becomes apparent that the question involved herein has become a moot question, and is now hypothetical, and no good result would be obtained by the further consideration by this court of the issue involved in this appeal.

Such being the case, the cause should be remanded to the district court of Muskogee county, with instructions to dismiss the same.

By the Court: It is so ordered.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list