
    SNELSON et al. v. BODOVITZ.
    No. 9900
    Opinion Filed Nov. 30, 1920.
    (Syllabus by the Court.) '
    Appeal and Error — Right to Review — Abstract Questions.
    Abstract or hypothetical questions, disconnected from the granting of actual relief or from the determination of which no particular result can follow other than the awarding of the costs of the appeal, will not be decided by this court.
    Error from District Court, Carter County; W. F. Freeman, Judge.
    Action between M. Bodovitz and T. B. Snel-son and others. From the judgment the latter bring error.
    Appeal dismissed.
    H. A, Ledbetter, fbr plaintiffs in error.
    W. F. Bowman, for defendant in error.
   RAINEY, C. J.

This is an appeal from the district court of Carter county. Subsequent to the filing of the appeal the matters in controversy between the parties appear to have been settled. Motion to dismiss has been filed on the ground that the case has become moot. The questions in the case having become hypothetical, the appeal will, in accordance with a long line of decisions, be dismissed. Doherty et al. v. Citizens’ Bank of Grove et al., No. 11,084, decided Sept. 7, 1920, but not yet officially reported; McCullough v. Gilcrease, 40 Okla. 741, 141 Pac. 5; Spaulding v. Yarbrough, 40 Okla. 731, 140 Pac. 782.

All the Justices concur.  