Case law

Reed v. State Election Board of the Oklahoma

369 P.2d 156 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 13, 1962

There is a distinct difference between the instant action and Brown v. State Election Board, Case No. 39,930, promulgated this date, 369 P.2d 140 . … In Brown v.

Board of Com'rs of Grant County v. Soucek

128 Okla. 151 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 6, 1927

The law was afterwards changed and the board of county commissioners allowed to designate the depositories' for the county’s funds, and in State ex rel. v. … X, MASON, V. C. J., and HARRISON LESTER, HUNT, and HEFNER, JX, concur.

Jackson v. Board of Com'rs of Muskogee County

133 Okla. 263 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 18, 1928

In Board of Commissioners of Tulsa County v. … See, also, Board of Commissioners v. News-Dispatch Printing & Audit Co., 122 Okla. 107 , 251 Pac. 607 ; Butler v.

Board of County Commissioners v. City of Norman

472 P.2d 910 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 23, 1970

During the proceeding counsel for Board of Commissioners stated the Board was not opposed to installation, but was of the opinion petitioner should pay a fair share of the cost. … Rex Truck Lines, Inc. v. Simms, Okl., 401 P.2d 520 ; Stewart v. Harris, Okl., 434 P.2d 902 ; Genet v. Smith, Okl., 400 P.2d 161 ; Skelly Oil Co. v. Dist. Ct, Okl., 401 P.2d 526 ; Hampton v.

Board of Com'rs of Adair County v. Ragg

194 Okla. 62 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 14, 1944

See, in this connection, Whiteneck v. Board of County Commissioners, 89 Okla. 52 , 213 P. 865 ; Hazlett v. Board of County Commissioners, 168 Okla. 290 , 32 P. 2d 940 . … In Continental Casualty Co. v.

Stephens v. Board of Com'rs of Pittsburg County

194 Okla. 679 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 5, 1944

S. 1941 § 432 et seq.), and to enjoin the board from conveying said property pending trial. Judgment was for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. … Cesar v. Oklahoma Farm Mtg. Co., 188 Okla. 659 , 112 P. 2d 800 .

Renner v. Board of Com'rs of Lincoln County

195 Okla. 400 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 10, 1945

Beatrice Creamery Co. v. Industrial Commission, 174 Okla. 101 , 49 P. 2d 1094 ; Clinton Cotton Oil Co. v. Holdman, 174 Okla. 423 , 50 P. 2d 732 ; Padfield v. Atlas Supply Co., 167 Okla. 364 , 29 P. 2d 958 ; Stayman v. … In Wilson v.

Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. v. Excise Board

168 Okla. 408 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 5, 1934

See Faught v. City of Sapulpa, supra; In re Protest of St. Louis S. F. Ry. Co., 157 Okla. 131 , 11 P. (2d) 189 , and County Excise Board of Creek County v. Gulf Pipe Dine Co., 156 Okla. 103 , 9 P. (2d) 460 . … That identical question was before this court in Excise Board of Creek County v. Gulf Pipe Line Co., supra, and in Protest, of St. Louis S. P. Ry.

Board of Com'rs of Pottawatomie County v. Waldrep

150 Okla. 228 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 14, 1931

Commissioners of Jefferson County, 13 Kan. 182 , and Nichols v. Board of Commissioners of Shawnee County (Kan.), 91 Pac. 79 . … Such has been the uniform holding of this court, and in Rice v.

Unit Petroleum Co. v. Oklahoma Water Resources Board

66 O.B.A.J. 2221 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 5, 1995

Simpson v. Dixon, 853 P.2d 176 (Okla.1993). … In American Home Products Corp. v.

BANKING BD. OF STATE OF OKL. v. Wilkerson

642 P.2d 1141 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 9, 1982

On at least two occasions we have held that appeals from the Banking Board must be reviewed on this basis. See Brown v. Banking Board, 512 P.2d 166, 169 (Okl.1973); Village Bank v. Seikel, 503 P.2d 550 (Okl.1972). … The Brown decision recognized the substantial evidence rule as promulgated by the U. S. Supreme Court in Universal Camera Corp. v. National L. R.

Board of Com'rs of Garfield County v. Bebb

52 Okla. 18 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 19, 1915

The established rule in this state is announced in the first paragraph of the syllabus in Anderson v. … Commissioners of Washita County v. Brett, 32 Okla. 853 , 124 Pac. 57 ; Ticer v. State ex rel. Holt, 35 Okla. 1 , 128 Pac. 493 .

Sadler v. Board of Com'rs of Mayes County

162 Okla. 303 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 14, 1933

court of Mayes county, a judgment was entered against the plaintiffs in error sustaining a demurrer to the petition of plaintiffs in error respecting the claims as to certain property sold and resold and bought in by the board … Mires v. Hogan, 79 Okla. 233 , 192 P. 811 . The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.

Board of County Com'rs v. Owen

196 Okla. 536 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 5, 1946

HURST, V. C. J. … King v. McCurdy, 171 Okla. 445 , 43 P. 2d 124 , and Seaman v. Chesnut, 190 Okla. 582 , 71 P. 2d 965 . The defendant relies upon City of Hollis v. Gould, 190 Okla. 335 , 123 P. 2d 241 , and 29 C. J. 377.

Douglass v. Board of County Com'rs

271 P.2d 720 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 8, 1954

The parties here appear in the same position as in the trial court and will be referred to as plaintiff and the Board. *721 The pivotal question for our decision is whether the defendant, the Board of County Commissioners … In support of the Board’s position it cites the case of Hoyt v. Carey, 186 Okl. 114 , 95 P.2d 891 . In that case plaintiff sought a recovery in excess of the sum authorized under his contract with the county.

Christian v. State Board of Education

540 P.2d 570 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 16, 1975

Darnell v. … This court has stated in Turner v.

Thigpen v. Board of County Commissioners

277 P.2d 992 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 14, 1954

State Industrial Commission, 150 Okl. 94 , 300 P. 627 ; Board of Commissioners of Marshall County v. Lacy, 161 Okl. 138 , 17 P.2d 398 ; Board of Commissioners of Tulsa County v. Bilby, 174 Okl. 199 , 50 P.2d 398 . … Such was the rule applied in Board of Commissioners [of Garfield County] v.

Board of Com'rs of Grady Co. v. Lenochan

80 Okla. 169 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 18, 1921

See Rogers et al. v. Rogers et al., 263 Fed. 160 ; Hudson v. Hopkins, 75 Okla. 260 , 183 *170 Pac. 507; Fink et al. v. Board of County Commissioners of Muskogee County et al. (U. S.) 63 L. Ed. 398 . … See Trimmer v. State ex rel. Rennie, 43 Okla. 152 , 141 Pac. 784 ; Miller v. State ex rel. Standard Savings & Loan Ass’n, 70 Oklahoma, 173 Pac. 67 ; State ex rel. Gault et al. v. Baker, 68 Oklahoma, 172 Pac. 1088 .

Cavin v. Board of Com'rs of Garfield County

168 Okla. 267 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 24, 1934

On the contrary, the board of county commissioners is the fiscal agent of the county. It has general control over the property and finances of the county. See sections 7449 and 7660, O. S. 1931; Board of Com’rs v. … News-Dispatch Ptg, & Audit Co., 122 Okla. 107 , 251 P. 606 ; McElwain v. Abraham (Wash.) 107 P. 832 , and Andrews v. Pratt, 44 Cal. 309 . In the language of this court, in Walton, Mayor, v.

Boardman Co. v. Board of Com'rs, Atoka Co.

70 Okla. 245 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 23, 1918

In Clapper v. … In Powell v. Nichols, 26 Okla. 734 , 110 Pac. 762 , 29 L. R. A. (N.