Case ID: cal-unrep_5/html/0866-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "TEMPLE, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

DEHAIL et al. v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES.
    L. A. No. 325;
    November 26, 1897.
    51 Pac. 27.
    Appeal—Dismissal.—Where Plaintiff in an Action to Enjoin the issuance of a tax deed appealed from a judgment against him rendered) on his refusal to amend after a demurrer to the complaint was sustained, he abandoned Ms remedy by appeal by afterward redeeming the property by paying the taxes, etc., and the court will not determine the questions raised.
    APPEAL from Superior Court, Los Angeles County; Lucien Shaw, Judge..
    Action by I. F. Dehail and others against the city of Los Angeles for an injunction. From a judgment in favor of defendant, plaintiffs appeal.
    Dismissed.
    Murphey & Gottschalk for appellants; W. E. Dunn for respondent.
   TEMPLE, J.

This action was brought to restrain and enjoin the issuance of a deed by the street superintendent of Los Angeles. A general demurrer was interposed to the complaint, which was sustained. Thereupon the plaintiff declined to amend, and, judgment having been thereafter entered, took this appeal. Since the appeal he has redeemed the property by paying the taxes, costs and percentage required. There is therefore nothing practical in the appeal, and to decide the questions raised would be to determine mere abstract propositions. The courts cannot be justly called upon to decide mere moot questions. When the plaintiff redeemed the property, he abandoned his remedy by the appeal, and ought to have dismissed it: Foster v. Smith, 115 Cal. 611, 47 Pac. 591. The appeal is dismissed.

.We concur: Henshaw, J.; McFarland, J.