In Finnie v. Town of Tiburon (1988) 199 Cal. App. 3d 1, the plaintiff brought an action seeking an injunction preventing a special election from occurring. ( Id. at p. 7.) The trial court denied the plaintiff's application, and the plaintiff appealed. ( Id. at p. 9.) However, during the pendency of the plaintiff's appeal, the election took place. The Court of Appeal held the plaintiff's action moot and dismissed the appeal. ( Id. at pp. 10-11.) In that case, opponents of a ballot measure brought an action to prevent an election on said measure. ( Id. at p. 7.) The trial court denied the plaintiffs' request for an injunction, and one week later, the election was held. ( Id. at pp. 7, 9.) Even though the measure was defeated, the plaintiffs appealed the trial court's ruling. ( Id. at p. 9.) The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal from the denial of the preliminary injunction as moot, reasoning: "It is well settled that an appellate court will decide only actual controversies. Consistent therewith, it has been said that an action which originally was based upon a justiciable controversy cannot be maintained on appeal if the questions raised therein have become moot by subsequent acts or events." ( Id. at p. 10.) The Finnie court noted that "'when the event which it was sought to enjoin, that is, the election, had taken place, the remedies of the plaintiffs were removed from the field of injunctive relief and were relegated to such remedies, if any, as they might have and avail themselves of subsequent to the election. Certainly they may not, after the election has been held, still urge a court to stop it.'" (Finnie, supra, at p. 11.) Because the election on the ballot measure had taken place, "in this postelection period any ruling on that injunction would be purely academic." (Ibid.)