Case law

Meadows v. Pittsburg County Board of County Commissioners

66 O.B.A.J. 2112 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 27, 1995

Rodgers v. Higgins, 871 P.2d 398 (Okla.1993); Jaco Production Company v. Luca, 823 P.2d 364 (Okla.1991). … Browning-Ferris, Inc., 833 P.2d 1218 , 1230 n. 66 (Okla.1992), we noted that 51 O.S.1981 § 153(B) states that the liability of the political subdivision under the Act is exclusive and in place of all other liability at common

Fourth National Bank of Tulsa v. Board of Com'rs

186 Okla. 102 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 19, 1939

Richards, 111 Okla. 185 , 239 P. 262 ; State v. McCurdy, 115 Okla. 111 , 241 P. 816 ; Sanders v. Board of County Commissioners, 160 Okla. 52 , 15 P. 2d 818 . … National Surety Co. v. State ex rel. Richards, supra; Sanders v. Board of County Commissioners, supra. We shall determine the proper amount of the judgment herein.

Thomason, Co. Treas. v. Board of Com'rs of Delaware

56 Okla. 79 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 29, 1916

The defendant in error, board of county commissioners of Delaware county, plaintiff below, filed its motion for writ of mandamus in the district court of Delaware county against plaintiff in error, J. D. … Co. v. State, 43 Okla. 368 , 143 Pac. 37 . By the Court: It is so ordered.

Citicorp Savings & Trust Co. v. Banking Board of Oklahoma

704 P.2d 490 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 23, 1985

Oklahoma Alcoholic Beverage Control Board v. … Wade v. Brown, 516 P.2d 526 (Okl.1973). 8 . United States v. Borden Co., 308 U.S. 188, 198 , 60 S.Ct. 182, 188 , 84 L.Ed. 181 (1939); also see U.S. v.

State Ex Rel. v. Excise Board of Payne County

155 Okla. 227 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 26, 1932

This being true, the excise 'board was without authority to reduce either the estimate or the levy. In the case of In re Tax Levies of City of Woodward v. … J., CLARK, V. O. J., and RILEY, CULLISON, SWINDALL, ANDREWS, McNEILL, and KORNEGAY, JX, concur.

Board of Ed. of City Drumright v. Bd. Cty.

171 Okla. 464 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 9, 1935

On December 20, 3924, plaintiff, the board of education of the city of Drumright, a municipal corporation, obtained a judgment in the district court of Creek county against the defendant, board of county commissioners of … A rule applicable here was stated and followed in Pitzer v.

State Ex Rel. Smith v. State Election Board

169 Okla. 163 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 9, 1934

Atty., v. Kenner, 21 Okla. 817 , 97 P. 258 ), it appears that there is no occasion for the exercise of such jurisdiction. The same is denied. By response of Lester E. … Dancy v. Peebly, 132 Okla. 84 , 270 P. 311 . Chapter 62, S.

Trudgeon v. Board of Com'rs of McClain County

180 Okla. 83 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 11, 1937

Western Paint & Chemical Co. v. Board of Com’rs of Washington County, 171 Okla. 302 , 42 P. (2d) 533 , and Chickasaw Lumber Co. v. Board of Com’rs of Stephens County, 173 Okla. 197 , 47 P. (2d) 137 . … Co. v. Board of County Com’rs of Carter County, 160 Okla. 232 , 11 P. (2d) 117 , and Board of County Com’rs of Payne County v. Standard Accident Insurance Co., 172 Okla. 355 , 45 P. (2d) 459 .

Cooper v. Board of Com'rs of Tulsa County

188 Okla. 42 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 1, 1940

He also cites Kirsch v. Tracy, 174 Okla. 489 , 55 P. 2d 428 , and Thompson v. Yates, 184 Okla. 86 , 85 P. 2d 415 . … It may be noted that in Jepeway v. Barrett, 165 Okla. 220 , 25 P. 2d 661 , it is held: “The statement in Mannus-Dewall v. Smith, 139 Okla. 195 , 281 P. 807 , and Massey v.

Board of Com'rs v. School District No. 25

141 Okla. 65 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 7, 1930

Board of Co. Com’rs, Carter Co., v. School District No. 71, 135 Okla. 248 , 275 Pac. 302 ; Board of Co. Com’rs v. School District No. 36, 135 Okla. 249 , 275 Pac. 303 ; Board of Co. Com’rs v. … No. 1, 137 Okla. 193 , 279 Pac. 326 ; Board of Education of Sapulpa v. Board of Co. Com’rs, Creek Co., 127 Okla. 132 , 260 Pac. 22 ; School District No. 7, Creek Co., v. Board of Co. Com’rs, 135 Okla. 1 , 275 Pac. 292 .

State Capital Printing Co. v. Board of Commissioners

8 Okla. 229 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 11, 1899

(Rogers v. Bonnett, 2 Okla. 553 , 37 Pac. 1078 ; Wetz v. Elliott, 4 Okla. 618 , 51 Pac. 657 ; Central Loan & Trust Co. v. Campbell Commission Co., 5 Okla. 396 , 49 Pac. 48 ; Ferris v. Higley, 20 Wall. 375 ; Clayton v. … The other errors assigned and discussed were fully considered, discussed, and determined by this court in Hockaday v. Jones, this volume, p. 156. The judgment is reversed, and the cause dismissed.

Threadgill v. Board of Ed. of City of Coalgate

85 Okla. 121 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 31, 1922

In O’Neal Engineering Co. v. … PITOHFORD, V. C. X, and KANE, JOHNSON, and. KENNAMER, JX, concur.

Excise Board v. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co.

152 Okla. 120 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 6, 1931

But in view of what .is 'held in Protest of Carter Oil Co., supra, and Boardman Co. v. Board of Co. … In Boardman Co. v. Board of Com’rs, supra, it was held: “Section 10102, C. O.

In Re Bank of Bixby v. Banking Board

524 P.2d 14 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 12, 1974

Subsequent to entry of the Court of Bank Review order this court adopted an opinion in Brown et al. v. … Banking Board, supra, the reviewing court will then be authorized to give the full review contemplated by Brown v. Banking Board, supra.

Board of Com'rs of Grant County v. Comstock

161 Okla. 43 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 20, 1932

Following the general rule and the provisions of the Constitution, probably, the case of Moore v. … V. C. J., and RILEY, KEENER, SWINDALL. and ANDREWS, JJ., concur. McNEILL, J., concurs in conclusion. CUL-LISON, J., dissents. LESTICIl, C. J., absent.

BOARD OF COUNTY COMM'RS OF CHOCTAW CO. v. Schuessler

358 P.2d 830 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 13, 1960

Commissioners of Land Office v. … No. 1 of King County et al. v.

School Board of District No. 4 v. Yalch

182 Okla. 605 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 3, 1938

In Dailey v. Citizens Nat. … BAYLESS, V. C. J., and RILEY, PHELPS, GIBSON, and I-IIJRST, J.T., concur.

Board of County Com'rs of Tulsa County v. Mullins

202 Okla. 628 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 18, 1950

In this connection plaintiff cites City of McAlester et al. v. State ex rel. Board of Public Affairs, 195 Okla. 1 , 154 P. 2d 579 , together with the cases therein cited, namely: Zachary v. … The distinction is stated in Hume v. Wyand et al., 68 Okla. 261 , 173 P. 813 , and in Liberty National Bank v. County Excise Board of Jefferson County, 175 Okla. 245 , 52 P. 2d 51 . In Hume v.

Strange v. Board of Com'rs of Choctaw County

158 Okla. 172 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 12, 1932

We think, under the provisions of this statute, where the board of county commissioners rejects the sale as advertised, a new sale must be made and a new notice by publication must be given and the sale approved by the board … In Airy v. Thompson, 154 Okla. 1 , 6 P. (2d) 445 , this court said: “Section 9745, O. O.

Consolidated School Dist. No. 72 v. Board of Ed.

113 Okla. 217 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 8, 1925

School District No. 44 v. Turner, 13 Okla. 71 , 73 Pac. 952 , is conclusive upon this phase of the case. … In the case of Pettis v.