Case law

Womack v. City of Oklahoma City

726 P.2d 1178 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 16, 1986

Its terms clearly imply that the vehicle’s delivery had been removed from controversy by the prejudgment order and that only the counsel-fee-and-cost issues remained. … The trial court’s judgment for the vehicle’s delivery to the owner established that the City had in fact imposed an impermissible precondition upon the release of an otherwise properly impounded and detained vehicle.

State ex rel. Hampton v. Oakes

281 P.2d 749 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 8, 1955

The well established rule of construction, as expressed in the first and fourth paragraphs of the syllabus of Board of County Commissioners of Creek County v. … We think it would be unreasonable to assume that it was the intention of the Legislature that such clearly expressed directions be ignored and effect given to statutes relative to filling vacancies in county offices, especially

Baggett v. State Election Board

501 P.2d 817 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 5, 1972

Baggett's petition clearly discloses that he was not seeking a recount of the votes as tabulated and returned by the separate precincts, and it clearly discloses that he did not allege that fraud occurred in the election. … No competent evidence was introduced tending to establish for whom the illegal ballots were cast.

Muskogee Sand & Gravel Co. v. Hulbert

156 Okla. 112 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 28, 1931

Clearly the contention made cannot be upheld. … The verdict of the jury indicates clearly that the trespass was not found to be willful.

Dunham v. Ardery

43 Okla. 619 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 15, 1914

His jurisdiction and authority is special and limited, and herein is clearly, definitely fixed just the measure of his duty. … The duties of the clerk in the instant case are clearly quasi judicial.

BAYOUTH v. DEWBERRY

550 P.3d 920 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 11, 2024

The parties clearly contest whether Mr. Bernstein was in the course and scope of his employment when he shot the Plaintiff. … Clearly, Bayouth cannot directly sue Employer in district court for the injury covered under his AWCA claim.

BOOTH v. HOME DEPOT

2022 OK 16 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 15, 2022

¶12 Appellant argues that, because the Acts protect all Oklahomans from criminal actions of fraud by a retailer, public policy is clearly established. Not so. The OCPA and the HRFA are not primarily criminal statutes. … Without a clear mandate from the Legislature, the Acts do not qualify as an established public policy.

In Re School District No. 62

180 Okla. 297 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 15, 1937

appeal upon notice signed by one-fourth of the resident taxpayers in part of the territory affected, yet we conclude that school district No. 62 itself is territory affected within the meaning of the act, and that it was clearly … The notice of appeal was signed by seven qualified electors -of ‘the territory rordered *300 attached to the Tulsa school district, hut they did not constitute one-fourth of the qualified electors of school district No. 9

Parret v. UNICCO Service Co.

127 P.3d 572 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 12, 2005

The phrase " 'defensive use' of the doctrine ... means that a stranger to the judgment, ordinarily the defendant in the second action, relies upon a former judgment as conclusively establishing in his favor an issue which … The text of 85 O.S.2001 § 11 clearly provides that an injury is compensable "without regard to fault” on the worker's part. . Graham v. Keuchel, 1993 OK 6 , 847 P.2d 342, 357 .

Gladstone v. Bartlesville Independent School District No. 30

74 O.B.A.J. 969 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 18, 2003

suspect classification nor with an infringement upon a fundamental right, the rational-basis standard of review governs this dispute. 29 Rational-basis scrutiny is a highly deferential standard that proscribes only that which clearly … 118 The common-law doctrine of governmental tort immunity protects public *449 funds from claims by private persons.

Zink v. Milner

39 Okla. 347 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 11, 1913

It was also shown that the father had been appointed and qualified, by the county court of Kay county, as the guardian of the person and estate of the child. … Milner rendered her better qualified to care for it than the father could possibly be.

Childers v. West Publishing Co.

195 Okla. 220 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 13, 1945

conflict with an act of Congress approved July 30, 1886, 24 Statutes at Large, 170, prohibiting territorial legislatures from “granting to any corporation or individual or association any special or exclusive privilege, immunity … placed upon the Legislature by the affirmative, mandatory direction of article 5, sec. 43, of our State Constitution, and the details involved are purely a legislative matter which will not be disturbed by the courts unless clearly

Application of Sanger

64 O.B.A.J. 3641 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 7, 1993

a rejected bar applicant is entitled to notice of the reasons upon which his lack of the requisite ethical fitness was rested and to a meaningful post-rejection opportunity in a timely requested hearing to prove himself qualified … The pertinent terms of Rule 11 § 7, Rules Governing Admission to the Practice of Law in the State of Oklahoma, 5 O.S.1991 Ch. 1, App. 5., are: "The burden of establishing eligibility for admission to the Bar of this state

Taylor v. Miskovsky

640 P.2d 959 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 24, 1981

Whether or not Appellant’s sources or files were clearly and convincingly relevant to a significant issue in the underlying lawsuit is the main issue of this appeal. … However, the record clearly shows that the authors and approver of the publications did not have prior access to or knowledge of Appellant’s confidential sources or anything contained in Appellant’s memoranda, notes, et cetera

Arrow Tool & Gauge v. Mead

71 O.B.A.J. 2896 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 31, 2000

It hence qualifies as a last order within the meaning of § 48(C). … would also qualify. 34 . 85 O.S.

Dryden v. Burkhart

198 Okla. 239 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 17, 1946

Fowler, who qualified and acted as such until July 21, 1941, when upon motion of Mrs. 'R. E. Eden, nee Luna A. … The purpose of the probate of a will is to establish of record its status as a written instrument (In re Bloom’s Estate, 213 Cal. 575 , 2 P. 2d 753 ). As declared in Bouvier L.

Cleveland v. School Dist. No. 79, Grady County

51 Okla. 69 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Aug 10, 1915

The filing of a petition signed by at least one-third of the cmalified electors of such district, and the giving of 20 days’ notice are clearly jurisdictional facts. … The law creates the corporation, and the performance of the required conditions qualifies the corporation to act.

In Re Initiative Petition No. 365, State Question No. 687

55 P.3d 1048 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 2, 2002

The evidence at the hearing established Mr. Calvin is a bona fide resident of the State of Oklahoma and is over the age of eighteen. Therefore, Mr. Calvin is a qualified elector and eligible to circulate the petition. … At the hearing, Petitioners elicited testimony that established these notaries were properly qualified. Therefore, we deny this challenge.

City of Okmulgee v. Okmulgee Gas Co.

140 Okla. 88 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 5, 1929

this state, the framers incorporated in the Constitution section 51 of art. 5, which reads: "The Legislature shall pass no law, granting to any association, corporation, or individual, any exclusive rights, privileges, or immunities … It is a safe rule to assume that the Legislature means what it clearly says.

State Ex Rel. Manhattan Const. Co. v. Barnes

22 Okla. 191 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 12, 1908

It is clearly apparent that by this section of the act the system of registration provided by said chapter 13, Sess. … Section 1 of article 8 of this act reads: “There is hereby created and established a registration system in the various cities of the first class in the state of Oklahoma for the registration of electors, and no elector shall