Case Name: POOLE et al. v. GILES et al.
Court: Supreme Court of Texas
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1952-03-26
Citations: 248 S.W.2d 464
Docket Number: No. A-3272
Parties: POOLE et al. v. GILES et al.
Judges: GRIFFIN and SMITH, JJ., join in this dissent.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 248
Pages: 464–473

Head Matter:
POOLE et al. v. GILES et al.
No. A-3272.
Supreme Court of Texas.
March 26, 1952.
Rehearing Denied May 21, 1952.
Masterson & Pope, Angleton, Alex Pope,. Jr., Fort Worth, for petitioners T. J. Poole,. Jr., et al.
Rucks, Enlow & Kee, Angleton, for petitioner J. L. Ducroz.
Price Daniel, Attorney General of Texas,, and Charles D. Mathews, First Assistant Attorney General, Jesse P. Luton, Jr., and E. Jacobson, Assistant Attorneys General,, all of Austin, and Bell, Dyche & Bell, of Houston, for respondents.

Opinion:
WILSON, Justice.
Plaintiff below (T. J. Poole, Jr., et al. and Donald K. Poole) sought and gained. an injunction against the School Land Board of Texas prohibiting that body from accepting bids and executing oil and gas leases to certain land in Brazoria County, Texas. The trial court granted a temporary injunction, which, on appeal, has been dissolved. 239 S.W.2d 665. Immediately thereafter the School Land Board accepted bids and executed leases upon the land in question. Plaintiffs applied for and were granted writ of error.
An order dissolving a temporary injunction is effective immediately even though not final. Rule 385(d), Texas Rules of Civil Procedure; Alpha Petroleum Co. v. Terrell, 122 Tex. 257, 59 S.W.2d 372; Duncan v. Boyd, 1926, Tex.Civ.App., 288 S.W. 281.
The temporary injunction was sought on the basis that the Board exceeded its authority. Since the injunction was dissolved at the time the Board acted, an action for contempt would not lie. It would be a vain thing for this court to reinstate the injunction when the act sought to be prohibited has already occurred. Therefore this case is moot. City of West University Place v. Martin, 1939, 132 Tex. 354, 123 S.W.2d 638; International Ass'n of Machinists v. Federated Ass'n of Accessory Workers, 1939, 133 Tex. 624, 130 S.W.2d 282; West v. Culpepper, 1940, 135 Tex. 156, 140 S.W.2d 166; Service Finance Corporation v. Grote, 1939, 133 Tex. 606, 131 S.W.2d 93. Plaintiffs are not without a remedy. See Art. 5421c et seq., Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes.
We do not pass upon the merits of the controversy. The case is dismissed. International Ass'n of Machinists v. Federal Ass'n of Accessory Workers, supra.