
    HOOVER et al. v. HARRIS, Co. Judge.
    No. 17162
    Opinion Filed April 12, 1927.
    (Syllabus.)
    Prohibition — Alternative Writ Made Absolute Upon Default of Respondent.
    Note. — See 32 Cyc. p. 627.
    Where an alternative writ is granted and the respondent is directed to show cause why such writ should not be made absolute, upon his failure so to do, the alternative writ will be made permanent.
    ° Original action by James Hoover and others, trustees of Jessie Bruner, for writ of prohibition against Thomas S. Harris, County Judge of Creek County.
    Alternative writ granted. Alternative writ made absolute.
    Pryor, Stokes & Carver, and Hugh Murphy, for petitioners.
   RILEY, J.

On February 2, 1926, a petition for writ of prohibition was filed by petitioners in an original action in this court. On said date an alternative writ of prohibition was issued by this court to the respondent, Thomas S. Harris, county judge of Creek county, directing him to show cause on the 6th day of February, 1926, why the writ should not be made absolute and permanent. No return has been made by the respondent, and no cause shown as to why said writ should not be made permanent.

By the issuance of the alternative writ, prima facie showing was considered ns having- been made .as to the justice and merit of the relief sought, and by reason of the default of respondent the alternative writ is made absolute.

BRANSON, O. J., MASON, V. C. J., and PHELPS, LESTER, CLARK, and KEENER, JJ., concur.

HARRISON and HUNT, JJ., absent, not participating.  