# Gaylord Entertainment Co. v. Thompson

> Supreme Court of Oklahoma · April 14, 1998 · 69 O.B.A.J. 1404

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9627376

## Case

- **Full name:** GAYLORD ENTERTAINMENT COMPANY, D/B/A the Oklahoma Publishing Co., the Oklahoma Publishing Company, Petitioners, v. the Honorable Donald D. THOMPSON, Judge of the District Court of Creek County, Twenty-Fourth Judicial District, Respondent, and Jessie Huff Durham, an Individual, and Beau Williams, an Individual, Real Parties in Interest; WORLD PUBLISHING CO., an Oklahoma Corporation, Petitioner, v. the Honorable Donald D. THOMPSON, Judge of the District Court of Creek County, Twenty-Fourth Judicial District, Respondent, and Jessie Huff Durham, an Individual, and Beau Williams, an Individual, Real Parties in Interest
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Oklahoma
- **Decided:** April 14, 1998
- **Citations:** 69 O.B.A.J. 1404; 958 P.2d 128; 1998 OK 30; 1998 Okla. LEXIS 36; 1998 WL 170063
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Simms
- **Judges:** Ala, Summers, Hodges, Lavender, Opala, Strubhar, Kauger, Wilson, Simms, Hargrave, Watt
- **Cited by:** 102 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/9627376

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- characterizing tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress as “narrow” and explaining that “[c]onduet which, though unreasonable, is neither ‘beyond all possible bounds of decency’ in the setting in which it occurred, nor is one that can be ‘regarded as utterly intole…
- explaining Rule 10(c) and a motion to dismiss is not converted to a motion to summary judgment by attaching thereto a document which plaintiff had incorporated by reference in plaintiff's petition
- noting that there is a “difference between interference with a prospective economic advantage and with contractual or business relations”

## Opinion text

SIMMS, Justice,
dissenting.
¶ 1 I must respectfully dissent to the use of this Court’s Prerogative writ power to halt proceedings in the trial court, which has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of the lawsuit. The writ is issued solely on the basis of the allegations contained in the trial court pleadings, particularly an amended petition. I would assume jurisdiction in this matter, however, solely to address the venue issue of whether or not Oklahoma should adopt the “single publication rule”. With the advent of mass publication and wide spread distribution of published materials, we should re-examine Oklahoma’s “multiple publication rule”, which would permit the action in this case to be filed in numerous counties of the state. Has the “multiple publication rule” become archaic? If so, then a prerogative writ might properly issue.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9627376. Public record. Not legal advice.