Swartz v. Public Service Commission

How courts have described this case

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

• “ ‘Moot questions or abstract propositions, the decision of which would avail nothing in the determination of controverted rights of persons or of property, are not properly cognizable by a court.’ State ex rel. Lilly v. Carter, 63 W.Va. 684, point 1, Syllabus, 60 S.E. 873 [(1908)].”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).