Case law

St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. Sutton

29 Okla. 553 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 28, 1911

The qualifying words do not change the rights of the parties under the charter. … State, cited in the main opinion, we repeat: “When such a point in the business of the road is reached, the right of the general public comes clearly into view and it is not for the railroad, but for the commission, to determine

Roxana Petroleum Corp. v. Hornberger

150 Okla. 257 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 16, 1931

Most clearly not. … The decision is clearly based (mi the proposition that, when application is made to the Commission to establish the injury, as well as to establish the extent of it, if for any reason relief is denied the claimant, that is

STATE ex rel. OKLAHOMA BAR ASSOCIATION v. JOHNSON

555 P.3d 1241 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 10, 2024

Nor does his mention of Covid-19 clearly show any incidence of how it interfered with his duties. … CONCLUSION ¶47 The Complainant has established by clear and convincing evidence the Respondent's professional misconduct.

Barzellone v. Presley

126 P.3d 588 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 29, 2005

Those questions are clearly and definitely established by our fundamental law to a certainty as functions of the legislative department. 77 This Court has a duty to interpret statutes to make their application constitutional … 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 due process of law; nor

Johnson v. Walters

62 O.B.A.J. 3397 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 29, 1991

Any attempt to qualify the approval is null and the bill does not become law. It is as if the Governor had exercised a "pocket veto." … Under Wiseman, "[a] qualified approval is tantamount to a `pocket veto' and the bill does not become law." 614 P.2d at 555 . Therefore, no part of H.B. 1743 became law.

Cook v. Oklahoma Board of Public Affairs

736 P.2d 140 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 31, 1987

An affirmance of the district court’s finding on this issue would clearly contravene the concept of freedom of contract. … The doctrine of sovereign immunity then in force precluded a tort claim against these governmental agencies. See Vanderpool v. State, Okl., 672 P.2d 1153 [1983], . Woodcrest Construction Company v.

GRAHAM v. D & K OILFIELD SERVICES

2017 OK 72 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 19, 2017

Clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, material, probative and substantial competent evidence; 6. Arbitrary or capricious; 7. Procured by fraud; or 8. … Prior decisions of this Court, however, do not support Graham's assertions. ¶29 Early in the twentieth century, this Court established that Okla. Const. art. 2, § 6 was meant to serve as a limitation on the judiciary.

PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF OK. v. Caddo Electric Coop.

479 P.2d 572 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 18, 1971

The constitutional guaranty against the impairment of contracts refers to contracts that are complete and clearly proved. 16 Am.Jur.2d, Constitutional Law, § 439. … have established their lines in municipalities are adequately protected by state and federal law from competition of rural electric cooperatives.

Dill v. Ebey

27 Okla. 584 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 16, 1910

The complaint, omitting the caption, is in words and figures as follows: “Comes now the said plaintiff and represents that he is the duly appointed, qualified receiver of the Citizens Bank & Trust Company of Stonewall, Indian … When, later, the Legislature granted equitable powers, it was held that, if the subject of a bill was one within the proper and established jurisdiction of chancery, the invention of a new remedy in common-law form, or the

N.H. v. Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)

70 O.B.A.J. 3260 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 2, 1999

We conclude that, under the facts presented — where the acts were clearly outside the scope of employment and the church officials lacked knowledge of the abuse — liability may not be imposed. ¶28 Summary judgment is proper … The United States Const., amend. 1 provides in pertinent part: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...”

Barnett v. Simmons

197 P.3d 12 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 10, 2008

Rock Oil desired to discover the dates the affidavits were created on Barnett's computer in order to establish a possible statute of limitations defense. … The suggestion that sanctions cannot properly be imposed absent a showing of willful refusal to produce is "clearly wrong." Atlantic Cape Fisheries v. Hartford Fire Ins.

IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF CARLSON

2016 OK 6 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 20, 2016

The court noted that "[f]oreign authority exists to the effect that a surviving joint tenant does not qualify for exoneration of a mortgage on joint tenancy property unless there is language in the decedent's will clearly … The right of FCS to present a creditor's claim prior to foreclosing is therefore established. The only question remaining is that of Grantees' standing. 2.

Simpson v. Dixon

64 O.B.A.J. 1721 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 21, 1993

(Emphasis supplied.) .Oklahoma City ward boundaries are established by Ordinance No. 19,715, enacted March 6, 1992. . … The Legislature’s recognition of the fundamental-law uniformity mandate is clearly reflected in the State election code [Code]. 26 O.S.1991 §§ 1-101 et seq.

Barnes v. Oklahoma Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co.

11 P.3d 162 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 16, 2001

No judicially sponsored common-law developments can lay claim to immunity from constitutional restraints on lawmaking activity that destroys accrued rights. B. The Teachings of Thomas v. … The threshold factor is that the decision must establish a new principle of law, whether by overruling clear past precedent on which litigants may have relied, or on an issue of first impression whose decision is not clearly

Philbrick v. Puritan Corporation

178 Okla. 489 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 29, 1936

So that fact does not render it immune to the insurance laws. The benefits to be received by assured may be either at the present or in the future, or both, as in the present case. … It is admitted that the appellant did not qualify itself to do an insurance business in the state.

Empire Oil & Refining Co. v. Fields

188 Okla. 666 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 26, 1940

There are certain undisputed facts which appear to be substantially the same as those recited in the former opinion as having been established in the first trial. … The statement made is one of common knowledge, which the jury would know anyhow, and it is so qualified that we fail to see how any prejudice could have resulted therefrom.

Edwards v. Thrash

26 Okla. 472 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 31, 1910

Besides, it is suggested that, where such a qualified fee in the city as we are now considering exists; The re-versionary right of the owner of the fee in the surface -of the street is too remote and contingent to be of any … All the courts seem to hold that,- under such constitutional provisions, consequential damages arising from the change of an established grade may be recovered by the abutting owner.

Chicago, R. I. & P. R. Co. v. Jackson

63 Okla. 32 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 9, 1917

Trevanion, still serves to indicate clearly and concisely the principle of the exception. Wigmore on Evidence, sec. 1747. … This it was sought to establish by inference based on inadmissible proof.

Beattie v. State ex rel. Grand River Dam Authority

73 O.B.A.J. 137 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 15, 2002

The words United States are in no way qualified and their use in this context is nothing other than a reference to the needs of the grantor, a status now held by plaintiffs. … Any words that clearly show an intent to create it are sufficient. Cf. Tangner v. Brannin, 1963 OK 101, ¶ 5 , 381 P.2d 321 . Accord, Hornsilver Circle, Ltd. v. Trope, 904 P.2d 1353 (Colo.App.1995); Tanton v.

Nolan v. Mathis

134 Okla. 70 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 2, 1928

Mathis, is the duly appointed, qualified and acting administrator ofl the estate of John Nolan, deceased. … This is shown clearly by our statute of frauds, and we think the case at bar furnished evidence of the wisdom of this statute.