Case law

Sharp v. Pawhuska Ice Co.

90 Okla. 211 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 3, 1923

We cannot conceive of a system of keeping accounts of this character that could be less liable to error or more clearly competent to be used as a reference to refresh a witness’s memory. … Such witnesses not having qualified as experts, it was not reversible error to reject their testimony. The sixth proposition goes to alleged errors in the instructions.

Berger v. City of Vinita

170 Okla. 214 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 16, 1934

Al Berger was elected city treasurer of Vinita in April, 1929, qualified as such, and executed her official bond with the United States Fidelity Guaranty Company as surety. … The facts in the case at bar clearly show a failure on the part of the city treasurer to comply with these legislative acts, even after the same had been specifically called to her attention.

Fent v. Henry

257 P.3d 984 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 15, 2011

Section 2.3 is clearly a house-keeping statute intended to apply when a change is made to a board, but consideration of the number of congressional districts was overlooked. … The Commission selects three, sometimes four, qualified nominees. The amendment adds two at-large members to the Commission.

ULLMAN v. OKLAHOMA HIGHWAY PATROL

2023 OK 100 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 17, 2023

The OHP attempted to establish that the plaintiffs failed to file suit within 180 days of August 12, 2021, the alleged denial of the claims by OMES. … It was clearly not intended to serve as a notice to trigger the time constraints of the Act. It was not addressed or sent to OMES.

Taylor v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.

981 P.2d 1253 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 9, 1999

Brashier declares that UM-loss recovery in bad-faith claims qualifies for a counsel-fee award under the teachings of Christian. B. … The award of prejudgment interest in Brashier rests on 12 O.S.1991 § 727, 31 which governs solely personal-injury elements of recovery. 32 Section 727 is clearly not applicable to a property damage loss. 33 The statute that

Avery v. Nelson

455 P.2d 75 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 22, 1969

Initially we think it should be said that while the right to take pretrial discovery depositions is afforded by our statutes, even though the purpose may merely be to prepare the taker for trial, the right is qualified by … The matter is clearly for the legislature.

Horn v. Sturm

408 P.2d 541 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 16, 1965

The deputy also testified such procedure was an established custom, engaged in to accommodate the attorneys in that county. … Affidavits of two of plaintiff’s counsel relative to misconduct of certain jurors during the course of the trial, and in their actions in qualifying themselves on voir dire examination as fair and impartial jurors when such

Rogers v. Lassiter, Adm'r.

196 Okla. 228 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 4, 1945

In plaintiff’s first amended petition it is alleged, in substance:, that he is the duly appointed and qualified administrator of the estate of Spencer Adams, deceased; that there is due and owing him as such administrator … The action was not upon this contract but was clearly disclosed by the petition and the evidence to be an action for money had and received by defendant for plaintiff’s use and benefit.

Coppola v. Fulton

62 O.B.A.J. 681 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 26, 1991

During a home visit on January 15, 1987, a case worker established that Coppola had actually received $1,615.00 of a $3,000.00 settlement. … The state rule uses the same language as its federal counterpart and clearly requires that allowable deductions be earmarked in the settlement or award for payment in order to be excluded as income.

Gray v. Stillman

365 P.2d 369 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 26, 1961

It appears more likely that grantors intended specific persons in being as recipients of the delivery of the deed, rather than whomever might qualify as “blood heirs” of Corles N. … Phelps, 105 Ind.App. 344 , 11 N.E.2d 503 , where a qualifying clause following the' granting clause provided that after' death of the grantee the land should 'pass to her daughter, it was held *376 clearly intended that grantee

Miller v. Delaware Insurance Co. of Philadelphia

14 Okla. 81 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 4, 1904

The assured will keep a set of books which shall clearly and plainly present a complete record of the business transacted, including all purchases as well as shipments of said stock, both for cash and credit, from the date … He argues that the word “entire” has no limitation as here used, and that no qualification can be found; that all of the words which were previously held to ■qualify had been omitted, and that it stands without limitation

Paine v. Foster

9 Okla. 213 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 13, 1896

Paine filed in the district court of Logan county his petition alleging that the defendants, Foster, Robertson, and Schnell, were the duly appointed, qualified, and acting trustees of townsite board No. 6, and as such held … The supreme court of Nebraska holds that the land department decided this question of fact erroneously, and that Starks never filed or made the former declaratory statement, that he was a qualified pre-emptor for the land

Schonwald v. Ragains

32 Okla. 223 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 12, 1912

Men now see clearly that freedom of action may, even in the industrial world, work injuriously for the public, and it must then be restrained in the public interest. … Flood, supra-, established the fact that Allen infringed no right of the plaintiffs, although he acted maliciously.”

Amoco Production Co. v. Lindley

609 P.2d 733 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 15, 1980

On equitable principles and in consideration of public policy, relief by injunction should not be granted unless the claim that the plan or process is a trade secret is clearly established, While injunction may issue before … Under the circumstances of this case, the Judge has clearly abused his discretion.

Territory of Oklahoma Ex Rel. Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co. v. DeWolfe

13 Okla. 454 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 10, 1903

Relator further says, that in laying gas pipe it is necessary that said pipe be laid to an established grade in order to secure proper drainage, and that if the said defendants are permitted to lay their mains, as aforesaid … and council in legal session, and of which there is no complaint even by plaintiff in error, would cure such irregularities, and thereby bind the city. *466 The order of the district judge dissolving the injunction was clearly

Kelso v. Sheppard

105 Okla. 231 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 18, 1924

An examination of the record, we think, wholly fails to establish any fraud on the part of the purchaser or .the guardian at said sale. … An. examination of the record, we think, wholly fails to establish any fraud on the part of the purchaser or the guardian at *235 said sale.

Chickasha Cotton Oil Co. v. Grady County

177 Okla. 240 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 7, 1936

The witness clearly revealed that she had no more than a casual recollection of the contents of the lost records. … The burden to establish the sales was upon defendant.

Stills v. Mayor

438 P.2d 477 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 5, 1968

Both plaintiff and defendant used qualified expert witnesses. Since the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict is not directly attacked, no further summary of the evidence is required. … The jury clearly and explicitly found plaintiff, cross petitioner and defendant all guilty of “contributory negligence”, thus making the verdict for defendant proper.

City of Lawton v. Morford

146 Okla. 222 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 25, 1930

By the attempted exercise of the right of taxation without the consent or approval of those who were to be taxed, the fires of the Revolution were kindled, lighting the way to the establishment in the New World of a republic … No one idea stands out more clearly than that barriers should be erected against the creation of municipal indebtedness.

U.S. Bank, National Ass'n v. Moore

278 P.3d 596 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 10, 2012

Appellants' argument is based on the failure of Appellee to establish Appellee was a person entitled to enforce the Note at the commencement of the action and the inability to establish the effectiveness of the indorsements … We find there is no evidence in the record establishing Appellee had standing to commence this foreclosure action.