State v. The Aetna Insurance Company
| Decision Date | 09 November 1912 |
| Docket Number | 17,315 |
| Parties | THE STATE OF KANSAS, ex rel. FRED S. JACKSON, as Attorney-general, etc., Appellant, v. THE AETNA INSURANCE COMPANY et al., Appellees |
| Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Decided July, 1912.
Appeal from Shawnee district court.
Case dismissed.
John S. Dawson, attorney-general, and S. N. Hawkes, assistant attorney-general, for the appellant; Fred S. Jackson, of Eureka, of counsel.
Z. T. Hazen, and R. H. Gaw, both of Topeka, and Thomas Bates, of Chicago, for the appellees.
The object of this action is to restrain the defendant insurance companies from carrying out an unlawful combination to control insurance rates in violation of the antitrust statutes. While the suit was pending the insurance rate law was enacted. (Gen. Stat. 1909, §§ 4265-4275.) This act requires the filing of a schedule of rates and other items with the superintendent of insurance, and gives that officer power to lower rates if found too high, and to direct an increase when found to be inadequate. If upon another trial of this action the state should prevail the duty and power of the superintendent would remain unaffected, the cost of insurance would still be the subject of state regulation. The public benefit sought to be obtained by this action is secured by the operation of the statute. The superintendent has proceeded to exercise the authority vested in him by general orders reducing rates. (Gen. Orders of Supt. of Ins. effective March 10, 1910, and July 1, 1911, Record of Orders, pp. 9, 15; Report of Supt. of Ins. for 1910, pp. xii, xiii.) Nothing of substantial benefit can now be gained by the injunction prayed for. The court is not required to give judgments that are not effective. ( Stebbins v. Telegraph Co., 69 Kan. 845, 76 P. 1130.) When questions become moot, judicial action will cease. (Hurd v. Beck, post, p. 11, 88 Kan. 11, 45 P. 92; Ziegler v. Hyde, 45 Kan. 226, 25 P. 568; Knight v. Hirbour, 64 Kan. 563, 67 P. 1104; Kansas City v. The State, 66 Kan. 779, 71 P. 1127; Waters v. Garvin, 67 Kan. 855, 73, 73 P. 902 11 P. 902; Jenal v. Felber, 77 Kan. 771, 95 P. 403; Bonnewell v. Lowe, 80 Kan. 769, 104 P. 853; Duggan v. Emporia, 84 Kan. 429, 114 P. 235; City of Ottawa v. Barnes, 87 Kan. 768, 125 P. 14.)
Following the usual practice in such cases the proceedings upon appeal are dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Allen
... ... 409] become moot, ... judicial action will cease." ( The State, ... ex rel., v. Insurance Co, 88 Kan. 9, 10, 127 P. 76.) ... (See, ... also, City of Kansas City v. The State, ... ...
-
State ex rel. Mitchell v. State Highway Commission
... ... When any legal questions become moot, judicial ... action ceases. State, ex rel., v. Insurance Co., 88 ... Kan. 9, 10, 127 P. 761; State v. Allen, 107 Kan ... 407, 408, 191 P. 476. A ... ...
-
Andeel v. Woods
...In support of appellees' contention the issues posed by appellants have become academic and moot, they cite State ex rel. v. Aetna Insurance Co., 88 Kan. 9, 127 P. 761; Anderson v. Board of Com'rs of Cloud County, 90 Kan. 15, 132 P. 996; Scott v. Glenwood Township, 105 Kan. 603, 185 P. 731;......
-
State ex rel. Stephan v. Johnson
... ... rel., v. Insurance Co., 88 Kan. 9, 10, 127 Pac. 761; State v. Allen, 107 Kan. 407, 408, 191 Pac. 476; State, ex ... ...