Case law

Monson v. State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Corp. Commission

673 P.2d 839 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 12, 1983

Const.; Halpin v. Corp. Commission, Okl., 575 P.2d 109, 112 [1977]. 20 . Brown v. Banking Board, Old., 512 P.2d 166, 170 [1973]; El Paso Natural Gas v. Corp. … Commission, Okl., 640 P.2d 1336, 1338 [1981]; see also Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board, 340 U.S. 474, 488 , 71 S.Ct. 456, 464 , 95 L.Ed. 456 [1951]. 21 . Yellow Transit Co. v.

State for Use of Board of County Com'rs of Pontotoc County Ex Rel. Braly v. Ford

189 Okla. 299 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 16, 1941

Sheel v. … Payne v.

Chisolm v. Weisse

2 Okla. 611 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 16, 1895

relied upon by them is, that neither the referee appointed in the district court to take the testimony in said cause, or the court had any right to examine into the question of fact upon which the decision of the townsite board … (Brown vs. Parker, decided by this court September 7, 1894.) There was no error in the district court inquiring' into the facts in this case and determining who was entitled to the lot in controversy.

Farrell v. Board of Education of City of Pawhuska

32 Okla. 194 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 6, 1912

Under the facts as disclosed by the record, this case is concluded by that of Citizens’ Trading Co. v. Wm. G. Bass, 30 Okla. 747 ; the facts being identical. … The question raised in this case being the same as that raised and decided in Citizens’ Trading Co. v.

CITY OF OKLAHOMA CITY v. BALKMAN

2020 OK 104 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 7, 2020

Causey , 1952 OK 134, 242 P.2d 712. 42 Exchange Trust Co . v. Mann , 1928 OK 357, 269 P. 275. 43 Steinicke v. Harr , 1924 OK 188, 240 P. 66. 44 Kiddy v. City of Oklahoma City , 1978 OK 28, 576 P.2d 298. 45 Brown v. … GOLDEN Discussed 2006 OK 26, 137 P.3d 681, MARTIN v. JORDAN Discussed 2006 OK 63, 145 P.3d 1040, IN THE MATTER OF M.B. Discussed at Length 2007 OK 56, 164 P.3d 1073, BROWN v.

Pardoe v. Sellers

164 Okla. 80 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 6, 1931

This court, in passing on this question in Brown v. Branson, 139.Okla. 271, 270 P. 63 , in the 2nd and 3rd paragraphs of syllabus, said : 2. … The majority opinion is directly and diametrically opposed to the case of Brown v. Branson, supra, and cannot be distinguished.

Chandler Materials v. Bd. of Cty. Com'rs of Tulsa Cty.

208 Okla. 189 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 10, 1953

The board contends that Groenewold v. Board of Com’rs of Kingfisher County, 195 Okla. 526 , 159 P. 2d 258 , is decisive of the question here presented. … In support of that contention they relied upon the authority of Groenewold v. Board of Com’rs of Kingfisher County, supra.

BAILEY v. STATE ex rel. BD. OF TESTS FOR ALCOHOL AND DRUG INFLUENCE

2022 OK 50 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 24, 2022

(citing Brown v. Nicholson , 1997 OK 32, n. 1 , 935 P.2d 319, 321 ; Kluver v. Weatherford Hosp. Auth. , 1993 OK 85 , 859 P.2d 1081, 1083 ). 9 State ex rel. Okla. State Bd. of Med. Licensure and Supervision v. … Lydick v. Brown , 1973 OK 135 , 516 P.2d 239, 241 (quoting Henry v.

Muskogee Wholesale Grocer Co. v. Durant

49 Okla. 395 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 23, 1915

In Albrecht v. … People’s Savings Bank v. Van Allsburg, 165 Mich. 524 , 131 N. W. 101 ; Brown v. Quigley, 165 Mich. 337 , 130 N. W. 690 , 34 L. R. A. (N. S.) 218. .

Barnsdall Oil Co. v. Ohler

48 Okla. 651 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 1, 1915

In Kimmer v. … Sheperd, 47 Okla. 258 , 147 Pac. 1031 , and Oklahoma Portland Cement Co. v. Brown, 45 Okla. 476 , 146 Pac. 6 , sustain the general doctrine to which we have referred.

Davis v. Oklahoma Employment Security Commission

238 P.3d 922 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 15, 2010

This Court has previously ruled that the failure to name the Board in an action for judicial review is fatal. Edmondson v. Siegfried Ins. … Brown, 1999 OK 79 , ¶ 9 n. 9, 989 P.2d 448 , 452 n. 9. [4] Taylor v. State ex rel.

Lowden v. Excise Bd. of Cotton County

170 Okla. 182 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 8, 1935

In accordance with the opinion in case No. 25479, Lowden et al. v. … Excise Board of Pittsburg County, this day decided, 170 Okla. 181 , 40 P. (2d) 16 , this cause is reversed and remanded, with directions to the Court of Tax Review to enter judgment in accordance with the stipulation as follows

HIRSCHFELD v. OKLAHOMA TURNPIKE AUTHORITY

2023 OK 59 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 31, 2023

HIRSCHFELD v. … Fraternal Order of Police v.

Cooperton Cons. School Dist. No. 10 v. Roosevelt Cons. School Dist. No. 7

194 Okla. 47 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 28, 1944

Pippin, 134 Okla. 136 , 272 P. 455 ; 56 C.J. 275, par. 120, and page 729, par. 852; Board of Education, City of Wichita v. Barrett, 101 Kan. 568 , 167 P. 1068 ; Hughes et al. v. … See Towle, Trustee, v. Brown, 110 Ind. 65 , 10 N.E. 626 , and for this reason we consider them inapplicable here.

Arthur v. City of Stillwater

611 P.2d 637 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 18, 1980

Walker, 237 Ark. 586 , 374 S.W.2d 476 (1964); Turner v. Board of Education, 266 S.W.2d 321 (Ky. 1954). [11] Sykes v. Belk, 278 N.C. 106 , 179 S.E.2d 439 (1971). [12] Lucchese v. … Walker, 237 Ark. 586 , 374 S.W.2d 476 (1946); Turner v. Board of Education, 266 S.W.2d 321 (Ky. 1954).

Oklahoma City Municipal Improvement Authority v. HTB, Inc.

769 P.2d 131 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 9, 1989

Freeling v. Smith, 77 Okl. 260 , 188 P. 96 [1920]; White v. State, supra note 3; Brown v. Board of Education, 148 Okl. 97 , 298 P. 249, 252 [1931]; Sumpter v. State, Okl., 418 P.2d 918, 919 [1966]; State ex rel. … Co. v. District of Columbia, supra note 6); Brown v. Board of Education, supra note 9; and School Dist. No. 34 v. Joint School Dist. No. 34, 156 Okl. 5 , 9 P.2d 771, 772-773 [1932]; but see Board of County Com'rs v.

Hardesty v. Gordon

189 Okla. 677 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 21, 1941

See Brown v. Chicago & N. W. Ry. Co., 102 Wis. 137 , 77 N. W. 748 , 44 L. R. A. 579. See, also, Culpepper v. Ocheltree, 256 U. S. 483 , 41 S. Ct. 579 , 65 L. Ed. 1054 . … Posey et al. v. Brown et al., supra. See Posey et ux. v. First Trust & Savings Bank et al., 158 Okla. 269 , 12 P. 2d 913 .

Hopley, Treasurer, Etc. v. Benton

38 Okla. 223 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 27, 1913

Oklahoma City v. McMaster, 12 Okla. 570 , 73 Pac. 1012 ; Provins v. Lovi, 6 Okla. 94 , 50 Pac. 81 . … In Territory of Ohio, v.

Rakowski v. Wagoner, County Judge

24 Okla. 282 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 13, 1909

Board of County Commissioners, 5 Idaho, 178 , 47 Pac. 943 , sustains the use of the words “term” and “session/'" in view of the context, as interchangeable. See, also, State v. … Vicknair, 118 La. 963 , 43 South. 635 ; MacNaughton v. Southern, etc., R. Co. (C. C.) 19 Fed. 881 ; Com. v. Brown, 11 Phila. (Pa.) 370; Doles v. Hilton, 48 Ark. 308 , 3 S. W. 193 ; Helm v.

Kunkel v. Rattray

110 Okla. 289 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 12, 1924

McGuigan and Louise Kunkel, the mother of the defendant, were members of the board of directors. At that time there was given to Mr. … See, also, Barker v. Bushnell, 75 Ill. 222 ; Finn v. New England Tel. & Tel. Co. (Maine) 64 Atl. 490 ; Colburn v. Groton, 60 N. H. 151; Roome v. Robinson, 90 N. Y. Supp. 1055 .