Case law

Godfrey Investment Co. v. Sturgeon

150 Okla. 47 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 23, 1931

Keen, who qualified and tried the case. There are several angles to the ease below, and a part of the litigants have come to this court and have filed the case-made and petition in error. … It was decreed, as to the $20,000 mortgage, that it was a lien for $10,300, with interest at 6% per cent, .from February 15, 1923, subject, however, to the lien established in favor of the plaintiff and the lien established

Eureka Reserve Life Insurance v. Glazner

115 Okla. 180 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 8, 1925

section 3” of the by-laws, but we find no “article 3” therein, and section 3 only provides that the directors and officers of the association shall be elected annually and hold office until their successors are elected and qualified … In Bacon on Benefit Societies, section 187, the rule is stated as follows: “It is a settled rule of construction that laws will not be interpreted to be retrospective unless by their terms it is clearly intended to be so.

STATE ex rel. OKLAHOMA BAR ASSOCIATION v. GREEN

465 P.3d 1197 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 28, 2020

¶21 In Count I, as the facts show, Respondent's actions clearly show that he was in violation of professional responsibility rules, specifically those relating to Competence, Diligence and Communication during his representation … Giger II explains it this way: Emotional or psychological disability may serve to reduce a legal practitioner's ethical culpability, but does not immunize that person from imposition of disciplinary measures that are necessary

State Ex Rel. Cartwright v. Dunbar

618 P.2d 900 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 29, 1980

After compliance with the condition and before patent, the state could tax.” *910 When Lederman was decided the United States Supreme Court had clearly established that an executory contract to sell lands by the United States … Under such an analysis, the interests of Koehring and Chesterfield who are holding under executory contracts of purchase, do not qualify for exemption under this section.

NYE v. BNSF RAILWAY CO.

2018 OK 51 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 19, 2018

Further, in its brief, BNSF only claimed immunity from damages under Nye's warning device claim but not immunity from suit. … A clearly visible electric or mechanical signal device gives warning of the immediate approach of a railroad train; 2.

Gaines v. Maynard

62 O.B.A.J. 934 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 19, 1991

The prison authorities have not established policies for administrative appeals from administrative decisions of prison officials to the district courts; 15. … Constitution are: "* * * No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without

Hartline v. Hartline

72 O.B.A.J. 562 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 13, 2001

Dep't. of Public Safety, 1983 OK 34, ¶ 12 , 662 P.2d 299, 302 ("From the language of §§ 7-601, the Legislature has clearly established a comprehensive compulsory liability insurance law. … Today's departure from case law is in essence no different from the abrogation of the common law doctrine of sovereign immunity crafted in Vanderpool v. State, 1983 OK 82 , 672 P.2d 1153 .

MacK Oil Company v. Laurence

389 P.2d 955 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 25, 1964

Under this test clearly none of the parties in the several conveyances intended to sever the water rights and convey only the agricultural surface of the land. … Therein we affirmed the landowner’s right to recover the value of water used off the premises, for the stated reason that a lease provision granting the lessee free water did not establish any right to supply water for use

HARWOOD v. ARDAGH GROUP

2022 OK 51 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 1, 2022

The Court's opinion holds that "A parking lot owned or controlled by the employer alone clearly constitutes the 'premises' of such employer, and is part of the 'employer's place of business." … I conclude that it "clearly" made such an exception.

State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Clausing

224 P.3d 1268 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 29, 2009

III THE CHARGES AGAINST RESPONDENT Count I-The Kulp Complaint 17 The charges against respondent arise from his handling of a spendthrift trust (Kulp Trust) established by Virginia K. … The evidence clearly shows that respondent did not act within the prescribed standards of conduct mandated for a trustee.

Bilby v. Gibson

133 Okla. 196 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 20, 1928

Bilby entered his appearance in the case without objection to jurisdiction, and since the assignment of error is a joint one, th'e same is clearly not good as to R. I. … The refusal of the court to receive such proffered proof, when clearly competent, is ordinarily reversible error.” Turner-Tulsa Co. v. H. Schnell & Co., 107 Okla. 125 , 230 Pac. 918 .

Walters v. Ratliff

10 Okla. 262 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 30, 1900

Nor does it follow that the probate court loses jurisdiction of a cause of action, clearly within its jurisdiction because it happens to involve the wrongful conduct of an officer. … Irwin, Sheriff, 15 Cal. 506 , the supreme court of that state said: “The rule as defined by our statute is almost in the language of that given, in the cases which establish the rule in England.

Sisler v. Jackson

460 P.2d 903 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 10, 1969

Peters, a qualified orthopedic surgeon who examined plaintiff, was of the opinion plaintiff’s injury resulted from an infectious process, only the peroneal branch of the sciatic nerve being affected by infection, but admitted … Additionally, argument relative to the instructions is coupled with argument such instruction allowed the juryc to consider evidence of no value, reject positive evidence, and then accept circumstantial evidence to establish

Woodruff v. Phillips

138 Okla. 77 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 10, 1929

possess the skill to detect unfitness, or the opportunities to do so, the *82 law may require diligence upon the part of the master; but where the appliance is a common tool, of which the man who uses it is necessarily well qualified … The court based its opinion upon two propositions: The first, that he was inexperienced, and this clearly appears ; and, second, that the employee was not in such condition as to appreciate his danger and properly exercise

Choctaw, O. G. R. Co. v. Drew

37 Okla. 396 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 11, 1913

Grants of privileges or powers to railroads, like those involved, confer no license to use them in disregard of the private rights of others, and with immunity for their invasion. Anderson v. Chicago, M. & St. P. R. … The case is therefore clearly not in point.

Wentz v. Thomas

159 Okla. 124 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 23, 1932

S. 1981, secs. 10072-10973] and by his acceptance of the appointment, his having duly qualified for the¡ office and his. entrance upon the duties thereof. … The proviso, by the law, established the exception by which his right and title to the office may not exist.

Oklahoma Company v. O'NEIL

333 P.2d 534 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 2, 1958

Fraud is never presumed but must be affirmatively proven, and all of its elements must be established, the absence of any one of them being fatal. … Westcott and his wife own all the stock in this company except one qualifying share. Westcott was an experienced oil man of the promoter type.

In Re Oklahoma Uniform Jury Instructions for Juvenile Cases

116 P.3d 119 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 28, 2005

It does not include an unwed father where paternity has not been acknowledged or established.” … It does not include an unwed father where paternity has not been acknowledged or established.”

Greenberg v. Wolfberg

890 P.2d 895 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 3, 1995

ascertain (1) the nature of the right the litigant seeks to assert and (2) when the plaintiff could have first maintained the cause advanced to a successful result. 43 Generally, the one-year time bar is set in motion by each qualified … If this inquiry establishes that counsel’s advice was relied upon by the plaintiff in bringing the component actions, it is a complete defense to malicious prosecution. Page v.

St. Louis S. F. Ry. Co. v. Richards

23 Okla. 256 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 23, 1909

The law will not give effect to a stipulation, if fraudulently entered into, that would grant immunity to iniquity and fraud. 9 Cyc. 474. … When reason returns to the injured, and the harm inflicted is discovered, then the asserted wrong, whether true or not, done at. the settlement, is made clearly apparent.