Okada Trucking Co. v. Board of Water Supply

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the appeal was moot “because the contract has already been completed” and that the remedy was “no longer available”
• recognizing exception to mootness doctrine “where a challenged governmental action would evade full review because the passage of time would prevent any single plaintiff from remaining subject to the restriction complained of for the period necessary to complete the lawsuit”
• recognizing exception to mootness doctrine \where a challenged governmental action would evade full review because the passage of time would prevent any single plaintiff from remaining subject to the restriction complained of for the period necessary to complete the lawsuit\
• \[W]e have repeatedly recognized an exception to the mootness doctrine in cases involving questions that affect the public interest and are `capable of repetition yet evading review.'\ (Citations omitted.)
• “[W]e have repeatedly recognized an exception to the mootness doctrine in cases involving questions that affect the public interest and are ‘capable of repetition yet evading review.’ ” (Citations omitted.)
• “Inter Island’s appeal is moot because the contract has already been completed.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).