Title: BRAUN v. STILLWATER ADVANCE PRINTING & PUBL. CO.
Citation: 1908 OK 224, 22 Okla. 620, 98 P. 42 6
Docket Number: 
State: Oklahoma
Issuer: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Date: November 16, 1908

BRAUN v. STILLWATER ADVANCE PRINTING & PUBL. CO. Annotate this Case BRAUN v. STILLWATER ADVANCE PRINTING & PUBL. CO. 1908 OK 224 98 P. 426 22 Okla. 620 Case Number: 2084 OK Ter Decided: 11/16/1908 Supreme Court of Oklahoma BRAUN v. STILLWATER ADVANCE PRINTING & PUBLISHING CO. Syllabus ¶0 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. Application for mandamus by Heinz Braun, relator, against the Stillwater Advance Printing & Publishing Company, to compel respondent and its officers to publish a notice of application for a liquor license. Dismissed. C. G. Horner and Burdick & Reece, for relator. Freeman E. Miller, for respondent. WILLIAMS, C. J. ¶1 Since this action was instituted the territory of Oklahoma and Indian Territory have been admitted into the Union as a state, and under the provisions of section 9 (Bunn's Ed.) of the Constitution, the license of the sale of intoxicating liquors is no longer permitted. Said section provides: "The manufacture, sale, barter, giving away, or otherwise furnishing, except as hereinafter provided, of intoxicating liquors * * * is prohibited for a period of twenty-one years from the date of the admission of the state into the Union, and thereafter until the people of the state shall otherwise provide by amendment of this Constitution and proper state legislation." ¶2 Abstract or hypothetical cases, disconnected with the granting of actual relief, or from the determination of which no practical result can follow, will not be determined by this court. Harman v. Burr, 20 0kla. 509, 94 P. 528; Parker et al. v. Territory ex rel Bostic, 20 0kla. 851, 94 P. 175 Freeman v. Board of Medical Examiners, 20 0kla. 610, 95 P. 229. ¶3 This case will therefore be dismissed without prejudice. ¶4 All the Justices concur.