Case Name: LEGAL RECORD PUB. CO. v. MILLER, Mayor, et al.
Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Oklahoma
Decision Date: 1915-12-21
Citations: 54 Okla. 287
Docket Number: No. 5556
Parties: LEGAL RECORD PUB. CO. v. MILLER, Mayor, et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Oklahoma Reports
Volume: 54
Pages: 287–289

Head Matter:
LEGAL RECORD PUB. CO. v. MILLER, Mayor, et al.
No. 5556.
Opinion Filed December 21, 1915.
(153 Pac. 1116.)
APPEAL AND ERROR — Moot Questions — Dismissal. Where, pending.an appeal, tlie issues have become moot, and no practical relief could be afforded by a reversal of the cause, the appeal will be dismissed.
(Syllabus by Brewer. C.l
Error from District Court, Muskogee County; R. P. de GraffenHed, Judge.
Mandamus by the Legal Record Publishing Company, a corporation, against W. P. Miller, Mayor, and others. Judgmfent for defendants, and plaintiff brings error.
Dismissed.
Franklin & Carey, for plaintiff in error.
Sumner J. Lipscomb, Owen & Stone, Chas. Bagg, and S. V. O’Hare, for defendants in error.

Opinion:
Opinion by
BREWER, C.
Plaintiff in error brings this appeal to have reviewed and reversed the action of the trial court in refusing to award a writ of mandamus, to compel the officers of the city of Muskogee to award it a contract to do printing during a six-months' period, beginning June 2, 1913.
Defendants in error have moved to dismiss the appeal, on the ground that the questions involved have become moot, and that no actual relief can be afforded through a decision. The motion should be sustained. Of course a writ could not now be issued compelling defendants to award a contract to do the city printing, during the period from July 2, 1913, to January 2, 1914. The printing has either been long since done, or is not needed, and cannot be done.
' Nor does the fact that costs might be saved plaintiff in error by a decision alter the case. Neither does the ' claim that plaintiff in error might have a cause of action .'for damages affect the matter under the circumstances of the case. This is not a decision on the merits; it is a declination to consider the issues originally involved in the appeal. Farquharson v. State ex rel. Calvert, 26 Okla. 767, 110 Pac. 909; Sneed v. State ex rel. Yoeman, 27 Okla. 259, 111 Pac. 203; Miller v. Ury, 23 Okla. 546, 102 Pac. 112; Greer County v. Elliott, 26 Okla. 546, 109 Pac. 731; Brown v. West et al., 28 Okla. 648, 115 Pac. 796; Jones v. East, 33 Okla. 604, 127 Pac. 261; Hodges v. Schafer, 23 Okla. 404, 100 Pac. 537; Standard Stone Co. v. Greer et al., 52 Okla. 595, 153 Pac. 640.
This appeal should be dismissed.
By the Court: It is so ordered.