Case law

Dixon v. Regional University System of the Oklahoma Board of Regents

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · May 17, 2023

Plaintiff’s claims was not clearly erroneous, nor did it result in manifest injustice. See King v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue, 207 Fed. … The Court stated that the law was unclear, and further noted that the evidence in this case was particularly unclear as to the nature of the leave and whether such leave would qualify under the Act.

Smeltz v. Ford Motor Company

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Oct 2, 2025

227, 229-30 (N.D.W.V. 1988); cf. 14C Wright & Miller’s Federal Practice and Procedure § 3731 (Rev. 4th ed. 2018) (“Courts ordinarily hold that oral statements do not trigger removability because those statements do not qualify … This event “clearly notifie[d] a defendant when it dismisse[d] a non-diverse party,” namely Woody Motor. Carter, 2024 WL 4562891, at *4.

Logsdon v. Crawford

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Nov 5, 2021

The Court must identify any cognizable claims and dismiss any claims that are frivolous, malicious, fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seek monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such … Plaintiff makes no allegations concerning individual federal defendants to provide the necessary direct, personal participation required to establish Bivens liability.

Eldridge v. Bear

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Sep 3, 2019

established federal law. … Petitioner has failed to show that the OCCA’s ruling on this claim was contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law as determined by the Supreme Court.

Dent v. Craig

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Jul 1, 2020

The “denial of a grievance, by itself without any connection to the violation of constitutional rights alleged by the plaintiff, does not establish personal participation under § 1983.” Gallagher v. … Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 5.2(a), the amended complaint must be clearly legible, and only one side of the paper may be used.

LONE STAR STEEL COMPANY v. United Mine Workers of America

691 F. Supp. 1280 · District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Feb 21, 1986

Defendants further assert that, as labor organizations, they are immune from antitrust liability under the statutory labor exemption to the antitrust laws, 15 U.S.C. § 6 (1982). … Clearly, the Union intended to modify the scope of the clause to the extent stated above. 46.

Whitten v. McCurtain County Jail Trust

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Jun 13, 2025

Thus, the appropriate inquiry is “‘whether the complaint sufficiently alleges facts supporting all the elements necessary to establish an entitlement to relief under the legal theory proposed.’” Lane v. … Additionally, he contends Plaintiff fails to state a claim against him and that he is therefore entitled to qualified immunity. A. Statute of Limitations and Oklahoma’s Savings Statute.

Little v. Mannas

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Jul 17, 2023

The opposing statement shall admit, deny or qualify the facts supporting the motion for summary judgment by reference to each numbered paragraph of the moving party’s statement of material facts.” … Revealingly, Plaintiff’s argument contains a section titled “Plaintiff has clearly articulated a cause of action.” Dkt. No. 185 at 14.

Swift v. Social Security Administration

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Sep 20, 2023

The 1 Step one requires the claimant to establish that he is not engaged in substantial gainful activity. … DeLaughter’s conclusions it is clear to this Court that the ALJ substituted is own medical opinion for that of a qualified medical professional.

Chaplin v. Social Security Administration

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Oct 13, 2023

NLRB, 305 U.S. 197, 1 Step one requires the claimant to establish that he is not engaged in substantial gainful activity. … Clearly, an ALJ cannot substitute her own medical opinion for that of a medical professional. Miller v. Chater, 99 F.3d 972, 977 (10th Cir. 1996).

Pearson v. Social Security Administration

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Mar 27, 2023

Clearly, an ALJ cannot substitute his own medical opinion for that of a medical professional. Miller v. Chater, 99 F.3d 972, 977 (10th Cir. 1996). … In rejecting the conclusions of three physician’s it is clear to this Court that the ALJ substituted is own medical opinion for that of qualified medical professionals.

Shaffer v. Marks

241 F. 139 · District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Feb 10, 1917

proprietorship thereof, the absolute owner of the oil and gas in and under it in its free and natural state, nor yet reduced to actual control of any person; but he, together with the other owners of land in the gas field, has a qualified … Wilson, which may be said to have established the doctrine in this state that oil and gas leases should be construed most strongly against the lessee.

Tipton v. Social Security Administration

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Mar 15, 2023

The ALJ clearly considered Ms. Mason’s treatment of Claimant, and under the regulations, that was all he was required to do. … An impairment that manifests only some of those criteria, no matter how severely, does not qualify.” Sullivan v.

Ray v. Pittman

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Mar 25, 2022

“Section 1983 provides a federal civil remedy for the ‘deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution’ by any person acting under color of state law.” McCarty v. … Plaintiff, however, clearly has failed to make this showing.

Rodgers v. Refresco U.S., Inc.

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Aug 11, 2021

The presumption, however, “‘may be rebutted . . . if the text of the charge clearly sets forth the basis of the claim.’” Id. … First, Plaintiff pleaded facts making it plausible that he was qualified for his position as a blender.

Lazy S Ranch Properties, LLC v. Valero Terminaling and Distribution

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · May 5, 2025

Miller is qualified to offer opinions on the state of the Wynnewood pipeline. … Macbeth is qualified to offer her opinions.

Cline

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · May 4, 2026

It posits, therefore, that the appeal of the amended judgment qualifies as ‘any judgment” and “relate[s] to the Appeal.” (ECF No. 706, at 4.) … Fifth, the Court’s Order approving the bond clearly incorporated the terms of the bond and guaranty agreement attached to Sunoco’s motion for bond approval. (See ECF No. 680, at 1.)

Statham v. Rankins

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Mar 27, 2023

Further, Petitioner’s complaint of ambiguity of federal decisional law does not qualify as a state-created unlawful impediment to support application of § 2244(d)(1)(B). … Sept. 17, 2021) (unpublished) (McGirt “did not recognize a new constitutional right when it relied on clearly established Supreme Court precedent” to determine Creek Reservation had not been disestablished); see also McGirt

Hughes Tool Co. v. Ford

114 F. Supp. 525 · District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Jul 2, 1953

He is a very intelligent and well qualified engineer who made a most capable witness. … Clearly, a patent is in itself a limited monopoly, authorized by law, if used without abuse.

Robinson v. Nationstar Mortgage, LLC.

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Aug 5, 2024

Robinson’s complaint does not clearly state the citizenship of each party, some of which are limited liability entities. … Robinson overlooks that the elements of Article ITI standing must be met even if a person qualifies as an aggrieved person under the FHA. See Bank of Am. Corp. v.