Case Name: Bachman et al. v. Thompson
Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Oklahoma
Decision Date: 1908-11-16
Citations: 22 Okla. 621
Docket Number: No. 2146
Parties: Bachman et al. v. Thompson.
Judges: All the Justices concur.
Reporter: Oklahoma Reports
Volume: 22
Pages: 621–622

Head Matter:
Bachman et al. v. Thompson.
No. 2146,
Okla. T.
Opinion Filed November 16, 1908.
(98 Pac. 426.)
APPEAL AND ERROR — Review—Abstract Propositions. Abstract or hypothetical cases, 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 the Court.)
Erroi- from. District Court, Greer County; C. F. Irwin, Judge.
Application of W. A. Thompson for a liquor license.' J. W. E. Bachman and others filed a remonstrance. From a judgment of the district court affirming a judgment granting a license, Bach-man and others bring error.
Dismissed.
On the 7th day of March, 1907, W. A.’Thompson filed with the county clerk of Greer county, territory of Oklahoma, his application, accompanied by a petition, for the purpose of having issued to him a license to sell intoxicating liquors in the incorporated town of Erick in said county. On the 28th day of March. 1907, the plaintiffs in error filed with the county clerk their remonstrance against the issuance of such license. The matter was duly set for hearing before the board of county commissioners, and on the 4th day of April, 1907, after said hearing, ordered the license to issue to the applicant. Plaintiffs in error then appealed to the district court, which affirmed the judgment of the board. Thereupon the case was brought by petition in error to the Supreme Court of the territory of Oklahoma, and is now properly before this court for consideration.
Jas. L. Brown, for plaintiffs in error.
Garrett & Wells, for defendant in error.

Opinion:
WilliaMS, C. J.
(after stating the facts as above). Since the filing of the petition in error in this case the territory of Ojk-lahorna and Indian Territorjr have been admitted into the Union as a- state. Under the terms of the Constitution (Bunn's Ed. § 9), a license for the sale of intoxicating liquors is forbidden. A decision of this case on its merits by this 'court would not avail anything to either of the parties hereto. The right of defendant in error to sell intoxicating liquors under such license has been expressly repealed. It has several times been held by .this court that it will not decide "abstract or hypothetical cases, disconnected from the granting of actual relief, or from the determination of which no practical result can follow." Harman v. Burt, 20 Okla. 509, 94 Pac. 528; Parker et al. v. Territory ex rel, Bostic, 20 Okla. 851, 94 Pac. 175; Freeman v. Board of Medical Examiners, 20 Okla. 610, 95 Pac. 229; Braun v. The Stillwater Advance Printing & Publishing Co. ante, p. 620, 98 Pac. 426.
This cause is dismissed without prejudice.
All the Justices concur.