Case ID: okla_113/html/0199-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "BRANSON, V. C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

WEST v. MICHELIN et al.
    No. 15888
    Opinion Filed Oct. 27, 1925.
    (Syllabus.)
    Appeal and Error — Dismissal — Moot Questions — Dissolution of Attachment.
    Where plaintiff attaches property for the purpose of satisfying a claim, sought to be reduced to judgment, and the attachment is by the district court dissolved, from which order dissolving the attachment an appeal is_ lodged in this court, pending the determination of which the issue on the .plaintiff’s right to recover against the defendant, whose property was attached, is determined by final judgment in favor of the defendant, the appeal from the order dissolving the attachment can give no relief, and a motion to dismiss the same should be sustained.
    Note. — See under (1) 4 C. J. p. 575. § 2383; 2 R. C. L. -p. 879; 1 R. C. L. Supp. p. 652 1 4 R. C. L. Supp. p. 127.
    Error from District Court, Carter County," Asa E. Walden, Judge.
    Action between Hugh West and A. L. Michelin et al. Prom the judgment, the former brings error.
    Appeal dismissed.
    Adams & Orr, for plaintiff in error.
    Sigler & Jackson, for defendants in error.
   BRANSON, V. C. J.

This matter is now before this court on motion to dismiss the appeal' herein, and it appears from the record that the appeal was taken from an order dissolving an attachment. It also ap- . pears that the plaintiff, who secured the attachment, prosecuted this suit while this appeal was pending in this court, and that on the trial of his cause of action, to which the attachment was ancillary, a judgment was rendered against him, from which no appeal was perfected, and the same is now a finality.

Under this state of fa.cts, the question of the correctness of the judgment of the trial court in dissolving the attachment is moot, and for that reason, the motion to dismiss the appeal should be sustained.

NICHOLSON, C. J., and HARRISON, MASON, PHELPS, LESTER, HUNT, CLARK, and RILEY, JJ., concur.