Can one appeal a moot judgement?
<p>Coming on the heels of <a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/91015/judgement-for-possession-when-tenant-vacated-the-premises">this question</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It seems like the action for possession would be moot under these
circumstances, prohibiting the court from entering judgment.</p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>Accordingly, we ordinarily dismiss as moot an appeal challenging an
eviction when the tenant was removed from or otherwise vacated the
premises.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>If a court enters a &quot;moot&quot; judgement, can one appeal the judgement on grounds that it should have never been entered in the first place?</p>
<p>Is a moot judgement equivalent to saying that the court lacked jurisdiction to enter the judgement at all and therefore should be appealable?</p>

<h2>Yes, you can appeal</h2>
<p>Deciding that an issue is moot is a matter of law. Issues of law are apealable.</p>
<p>So, from your example, if the evidence showed that the tenant was still at the premises and, for whatever reason, the court misinterpreted or misunderstood that evidence, then there would clearly have been an appealable error of law in deciding that the issue was moot.</p>
<p>However, if the evidence showed the tenant had left the premises and the court decided on that basis the case was moot they would have clearly been right and an appeal would fail.</p>

<p><a href="/questions/tagged/canada" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;" aria-label="show questions tagged &#39;canada&#39;" rel="tag" aria-labelledby="tag-canada-tooltip-container">canada</a></p>
<p>Mootness is not a jurisdictional issue for superior courts in Canada. Instead, mootness is a discretionary doctrine reflecting a desire to preserve an adversarial context and a concern for judicial economy. Even if an matter is moot in that it fails to present a &quot;live controversy,&quot; a court may nonetheless decide the issue if the circumstances warrant. See generally <em>Borowski v. Canada (Attorney General)</em>, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 342.</p>
<p>Therefore, that a lower court addressed a moot issue is not a ground for appeal. In fact, if the issue was actually moot, it will continue to be moot on appeal, and that may be a reason for the court of appeal to decline to entertain any questions on the merits.</p>

<p>Assuming that the determination that the judgment was moot is correct, you cannot appeal it. Under the circumstances explained, it would indeed be moot.</p>
<p>The fact that the judgment became moot before appeals were exhausted, however, may prevent the judgment from having &quot;collateral estoppel&quot; effect, which is to say that the factual and legal determinations necessary to make that ruling may not be binding in any related case.</p>

united-states civil-law new-jersey court-order