Drummond v. Jeffrey
Cases that cite this one
30 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Smith v. State Ex Rel. Board of Regents of Oklahoma State University (Okla. 1993)
- Redwine Resources, Inc. v. Predator Technologies, L.L.C. (Okla. Civ. App. 2007)
- Max & Tookah Campbell Co. v. T. G. & Y. Stores (Okla. Civ. App. 1981)
- Gentry v. State Industrial Commission (Okla. 1948)
- Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. v. Morgeson (Okla. 1947)
- Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. v. Wade (Okla. 1946)
- E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. Spencer (Okla. 1945)
- Stansell v. Tucker (Okla. 1942)
- Sumerlin v. Department of Labor & Industries (Wash. 1941)
- Brown v. Board of Com'rs of Payne County (Okla. 1940)
- J. B. Klein Iron & Foundry Co. v. State Industrial Commission (Okla. 1939)
- Moran-Buckner Co. v. French (Okla. 1939)
- Atlantic Refining Co. v. Allen (Okla. 1939)
- Skelly Oil Co. v. Harrell (Okla. 1939)
- R. S. Smith Construction Co. v. Swindell (Okla. 1939)
- Asplund Construction Co. v. State Industrial Commission (Okla. 1939)
- United States Gypsum Co. v. Reames (Okla. 1939)
- Coleman v. City of Newkirk (Okla. 1939)
- Eyer v. Department of Labor & Industries (Wash. 1939)
- Pine Valley Lumber Co. v. Robinson (Okla. 1938)
- Turner v. Ford (Okla. 1938)
- Board of Com'rs v. State Industrial Commission (Okla. 1938)
- McCawley v. Crane (Okla. 1938)
- Wilhelm v. State Industrial Commission (Okla. 1938)
- Farmers' Gin Co. v. Carpenter (Okla. 1938)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Plaintiff commenced this action and at the inception applied for a temporary injunction, which was by the court denied. From thlat order he appealed to this court and filed his petition in error with case-made attached on February 7, 1936. After the appeal was lodged in this court, the trial court hdard the cause on its merits and denied the application for injunction. A motion to dismiss has been filed for the reason that this appeal is moot. We 'are of the opinion and hold that the appeal from the order refusing to grant the temporary injunction has become moot. The sole purpose of a temporary injunction is to maintain the clause in statu quo until a trial upon the merits. High on Injunctions (4th Ed.) section 3; 32 C. J. page 20; Ex parte Grimes, 20 Okla. 446, 94 P. 668. In this connection see West v. Michelin, 113 Okla. 199, 240 P. 738.
The appeal is dismissed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.