# Steed v. Bain-Holloway

> Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · July 31, 2015 · 356 P.3d 62

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5177817

## Case

- **Full name:** Breanne STEED and Jerri Van Ellen v. Chase Patterson BAIN-HOLLOWAY, and Conner Alexander Acebo, Edson Vladmir Bellefleur, Darren Lee Bryant, Jarrod Henry Burke, James Edward Carlisle, Jennifer Denee Carlisle, Steven Rene Castellon, Wilbert Lee Coleman II, Curtis Osmyn Conley, Micah Darrell Conner, Brandon Edward Cox, Karl Joseph Crowley, Kyle Diffee, William Eugene Dunbar II, Brandee Alexandrea Foster, Wendell Foster Spencer, Charles Lorun Franklin IV, Brittany Lea Gilliam, Shane Allen Gray, Gary Lee Haddad, Andrew Harwell, Tony Newman Hilburn, Eric Paul Hopkins, Buckley Connor Horton, Randall Anthony Horton, Richard Joseph Irvine, Rebecca Clytee Keck, David John Kennedy, Dennis Laneil King Jr., Wonder Alexander Logan, Wendell Allan Mann, Zachary Ryan Mott, Preston Mark Nahmias, Tracy Lea O'Bryan, Jack Leroy O'Donnell, Matthew Richard Peel, Allison Leslie Perrin, Daisha Jean Ray, Jacob Ryan Roley, Eddy Duane Sellers, Andrew Jackson Smith, Natasha Speilman, Gary Phillip Stamper, Ryan Marcus Steeves, Matthew Stiger, Mistic Storm, Shelly L, Tillison, Angela K. Torres
- **Court:** Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma
- **Decided:** July 31, 2015
- **Citations:** 356 P.3d 62; 2015 OK CIV APP 68; 2015 Okla. Civ. App. LEXIS 63; 2015 WL 5104615
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Bell
- **Judges:** Bell, Buettner, Goree
- **Cited by:** 4 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5177817

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that enactment of the Model Drug Dealer Liability Act is “ ‘a matter for the legislative body and not the courts’ ” (quoting Case v. Fibreboard Corp., 743 P.2d 1062, 1067 (Okla. 1987))

## Opinion text

BELL, J.,
dissenting with opinion.
1 26 The majority loges sight of the underlying principle that, because of the nature of the illicit drug trade, defendants brought into court under the Drug Dealer Liability Act are in the best position to supply exculpatory evidence, Such a shift of the burden of persuasion would most definitely violate the Due Process Clause in a criminal proceeding, but in a civil case the situation is less clear. The Supreme Court of the United States has confirmed the notion that statutory presumptions in civil proceedings receive less serutiny than statutory presumptions of eriminal proceedings. Feiock v. Feiock, 485 U.S. 624 , 108 8.Ct. 1423, 99 L.Ed.2d 721 (1988).
T27 The majority cites Case v. Fibreboard Corp., 1987 OK 79 , 743 P.2d 1062 , when analyzing market share liability,. I agree with a statement from that case, where "the creation of a program of compensation for victims ... as a matter of policy is a matter for the legislative body and not for the courts."

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5177817. Public record. Not legal advice.