Ryan v. Geiger

California Court of Appeal Oct 9, 1936 No. Civ. No. 10031Published

Before: Sturtevant

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court dismissed the appeal because the issues presented in the case became moot following the decision in a related case.

Issues

Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a writ of mandamus to compel the issuance of a stable permit.

Disposition. Dismissed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“By reason of the conclusion which we have reached in the case cited, all questions involved in the instant case have become moot.”

“Therefore the appeal should be dismissed.”

STURTEVANT, J. The plaintiff commenced a proceeding asking for a writ of mandamus directing the defendant as director of health to issue to the plaintiff a permit to conduct a stable. The court made findings in favor of the defendant. From the judgment entered thereon the plaintiff appealed. The judgment so appealed from was entered April 23, 1935. The judgment was entered March 20, 1935, in the case entitled People v. James J. Ryan, No. 10032 (ante, p. 1 [61 Pac. (2d) 360]), this day filed. By reason of the conclusion which we have reached in the case cited, all questions involved in the instant case have become moot. Therefore the appeal should be dismissed. (2 Cal. Jur. 123.)

It is so ordered.

Nourse, P. J., and Spence, J., concurred.

Ryan v. Geiger

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief