Case law

Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. Holliday

45 Okla. 536 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 9, 1915

We are clearly of the opinion they did noc. … The Legislature shall pass no law granting to any ^sociation, corporation, or individual, any exclusive rights, privileges or immunities within this state.” “Sec. 59.

OKLAHOMA GAS AND ELECTRIC CO. v. STATE ex rel. OKLAHOMA CORP. COMMISSION

2025 OK 15 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 4, 2025

OG&E's successful proposal relied on the Large Load exception to RESCTA, which permits a supplier "extending its service" into another supplier's certified territory for qualifying large-load customers. … The record here does not clearly establish that the Commission had either a longstanding rule or a well-known de facto policy of permitting the disputed conduct.

Ricks Exploration Co. v. Oklahoma Water Resources Board

695 P.2d 498 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 16, 1984

II PUBLIC LAW AND PRIVATE LAW CONSIDERATIONS Ricks contends that it qualifies as a landowner within the meaning of § 1020.11(D) and that it has a right of reasonable use of the groundwater in connection with its oil- and-gas … When the legislature sought to affect the mineral owner’s common-law right of free access and reasonable use of the surface for oil-and-gas purposes in the 1982 Surface Damages Act, it clearly and explicitly expressed this

In Re Initiative Petition No. 349, State Question No. 642

65 O.B.A.J. 3225 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Aug 4, 1992

Whether for want of justicia-bility or ripeness, the majority in Poe clearly found that case unfit for judicial consideration as a controversy. … Raines, supra note 23, 362 U.S. at 22 , 80 S.Ct. at 523 (a litigant must generally assert his own constitutional rights and immunities).

State ex rel. Pollution Control Coordinating Board v. Kerr-McGee Corp.

619 P.2d 858 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 4, 1980

. *864 Defendant Cushing objected to the admission of testimony of a qualified expert reference his opinion as to the cause of the fish dying. … Before this court will reverse a case for alleged error in giving instructions, it must clearly appear that the instruction complained of has caused a miscarriage of justice. 14 Although the trial court no doubt erred in

Hancock v. Mutual Trust Co.

24 Okla. 391 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 13, 1909

The Congress of the United States and the members of the different tribes clearly foresaw that the increasing pressure of white people surrounding these nations, crowding over and intermingling with them, rendered a further … continuance of their qualified tribal independence of the government of the United States not only impracticable and probably impossible of accomplishment, but also that the friction occasioned by an effort to continue it

Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Co. v. Miller

486 P.2d 630 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 25, 1971

The plaintiff, with 25 years experience as a switchman, was qualified to testify as an expert witness under the facts presented that the method of shoving was the proper and safer procedure. … In the first place such instruction is not supported by any evidence because the evidence clearly shows that plaintiff did look for danger and did use ordinary care.

Oklahoma Alcoholic Beverage Control Board v. Parkhill Restaurants, Inc.

669 P.2d 265 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 5, 1983

They were kept in the same area of the establishment, although the bottles for the private parties were segregated from the balance of the stock. … Upon confiscation, the bottles were intermingled so that only those which were labeled were clearly identifiable.

Loffland Bros. Co. v. Overstreet

758 P.2d 813 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 17, 1988

Falstaff Brewing Corp., 21 in determining whether Loffland’s plan qualifies as being an unfunded employee benefit plan. … In summary, we conclude that benefits under STEP are not funded by any separate account with a clearly segregated res; nor is STEP a part and parcel of all employees’ compensation with Loffland; that is, STEP is not a basic

State Ex Rel. MacY v. BD. OF COM'RS

986 P.2d 1130 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 1, 1999

That result would clearly be contrary to the legislative intent. … Both parties were clearly entitled to gain district court access for resolution of their controversy by a judicial declaration of rights.

Mathews v. Sniggs

75 Okla. 108 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 1, 1919

Plaintiffs contend that the deed was given to. enable defendant Sniggs to qualify as a surety on the bond of Lorena Mathews. … The doctrine thus uniformly established in reference to the effect of the reform legislation upon primary rights and duties and causes of action is also as clearly settled in reference to its effect upon remedies and remedial

Republic National Life Insurance Co. v. Chilcoat

368 P.2d 821 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 24, 1961

While there is some repetition in both of the instructions complained of, we have held that, ordinarily, repetition in instructions, of itself, is not reversible error unless it clearly appears to have misled the jury. … If he was, he would not qualify for life insurance at all. But his blood pressure and his pulse and the fact that he used crutches, made him rather highly substandard. * * *. "Q.

Consolidated Pipe Line Co. v. British American Oil Co.

163 Okla. 171 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 11, 1933

The defendant, Consolidated Pipe Line Company, is also a foreign corporation, but has qualified to do business in the state of Oklahoma, maintaining its office at Tulsa, Okla. On the 10th day of December, 1923, one J. … The principle involved is clearly stated in 20 R. C.

STEVENS v. FOX

383 P.3d 269 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 11, 2016

We noted the framers of our Constitution clearly intended a separation of powers between the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government. Id. … This Court also determined Oklahoma’s extant jurisprudence clearly delimits the Court’s power over the Legislature, citing Jones v.

Burks v. Walker

25 Okla. 353 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 14, 1909

That portion of the section reading “and such other courts, commissions or boards, inferior to the Supreme Court, as may be established by law” clearly contemplates and provides that a portion of the judicial power of the … resolution and submit the question whether such court should be established to the qualified voters of the city and two thirds of the votes cast thereon were in favor of the establishment of the court, was held not to be

Hembree v. Magnolia Petroleum Co.

176 Okla. 524 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 1, 1935

It is not an estate that can be the subject of barter and sale, but may be waived, abandoned, or renounced at will, without consideration, by parties who are legally qualified to waive such rights. … Clearly, this expression of the court states a correct principle of law.

Oklahoma Tax Commission v. Smith

610 P.2d 794 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 5, 1980

Lastly, there was argued no authority to establish a taxpayer’s “right” to any deduction save Legislative grace. … in the same definitional section as the definition above states that “any term used in this act shall have the same meaning as when used in a comparable context in the Internal Revenue Code, unless a different meaning is clearly

Keeter v. State Ex Rel. Saye, Co.

82 Okla. 89 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 31, 1921

But in doing this, they preserve the historical jury of twelve men, with all its incidents, unless a contrary purpose clearly appears.’ (Cooley’s Constitutional Limitations, 589). … The same act authorized the establishment of an organized territorial government in Oklahoma Territory.

James v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.

62 O.B.A.J. 1228 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 16, 1991

James, a resident of Sapulpa, Oklahoma, heard that State Farm was interested in training a qualified individual to become one of its agents in Glenpool, Oklahoma, which is located approximately eight (8) miles from Sapulpa … Trial exhibits establish that Norvel Trask, Green’s supervisor and the top executive in the regional office, authorized the listing.

In Re Groves'estate

321 P.2d 381 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 11, 1957

Both doctors testified that the doctors in attendance upon deceased were better qualified to determine the mental capacity of deceased than were they who had not seen him. … Before considering the evidence which we think is decisive of the issues here presented, we first consider the established principles of law pertinent to testamentary capacity.