Case Name: GUINN et al. v. SECURITY STATE BANK
Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Oklahoma
Decision Date: 1917-11-06
Citations: 74 Okla. 102
Docket Number: No. 9343
Parties: GUINN et al. v. SECURITY STATE BANK.
Judges: All the Justices concur.
Reporter: Oklahoma Reports
Volume: 74
Pages: 102–102

Head Matter:
GUINN et al. v. SECURITY STATE BANK.
No. 9343
Opinion Filed Nov. 6, 1917.
(168 Pac. 804.)
(Syllabus.)
Appeal and Error — Abatement—Payment to Prevent Enforcement of Decree.
Payment of a judgment to prevent sale under an order of sale to enforce a decree of foreclosure, is an involuntary payment and does not abate pending proceedings in 'error to reverse tbe judgment.
Action by tbe Security State Bank against W. T. Guinn and others. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error. On motion to dismiss appeal.
Overruled.
Erwin & Erwin, for plaintiffs in error.
H. W. Harris, for defendant in error.

Opinion:
OWEN, J.
Tbis case comes on at this time upon motion to dismiss tbe appeal. Tbe defendant in error secured a money judgment, in tbe trial court, and a decree of foreclosure of mortgage against tbe plaintiffs in error. Pending appeal in tbis-court, without supersedeas, an order of sale issued to enforce the judgment. Plaintiffs in error paid tbe judgment to prevent sale. Defendant in error moves to dismiss the appeal upon the ground that, tbe judgment having been fully paid, tbe issues involved -have become moot. In the cases cited in support of the motion there was a voluntary payment of tbe judgment or settlement of tbe issues.
A payment of tbe judgment to prevent sale under execution or order of sale is not a voluntary satisfaction of tbe judgment. An involuntary payment or satisfaction of judgment or decree cannot be construed as a release of errors assigned on appeal. 3 C. J. 675-678; O'Hara v. McConnell, 93 U. S. 150, 23 L. Ed. 840; Erwin v. Lowry, 7 How, 172, 12 L. Ed. 655; Freight v. Wyand (Kan.) 99 Pac. 611; Auld v. Kimberlen, 7 Kan. 601; Kerr v. Reece, 27 Kan. 469.
The motion to dismiss is overruled.
All the Justices concur.