Case law

State Ex Rel. King v. White

170 Okla. 126 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 18, 1934

Friend v. Cummings, 47 Okla. 44 , 147 P. 161 . No attention was paid to this act of the Legislature by this school district or school board at that time. … Co. v. Haynes, Co. Tr., 8 Okla. 576 , 58 P. 738 ; Union Sav. Ass’n v. Burns, 74 Okla. 1 , 176 P. 227 ; and Hollis v. Adams Gin Co., 115 Okla. 25 , 241 P. 744 ).

Phillips v. Williams

583 P.2d 488 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 25, 1978

United States Board of Parole, 167 U.S.App.D.C. 268 , 511 F.2d 1270 (1974); Cook v. Whiteside, 505 F.2d 32 (5th Cir. 1974); Mower v. Britton, 504 F.2d 396 (10th Cir. 1974); United States ex rel. Johnson v. … Monks v. State Board of Parole, 58 N. J. 238, 277 A.2d 193, 196 (1971).

Matter of Adoption of Michelle N.

577 P.2d 68 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 4, 1978

In Mann v. … See, Wade v. Brown, Okl., 516 P.2d 526 (1973). When such fundamental rights are at issue, the standard of proof must be at least clear and convincing proof. See: Alsager v. District Court of Polk Cty., Iowa, 406 F.

Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Lane

184 Okla. 219 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 6, 1938

Swift & Co., 180 Okla. 252 , 68 P.2d 508 ; while it is the contention of the respondent that it comes within the rule of Fox v. Brown, 176 Okla. 201 , 55 P.2d 129 ; E. G. Fike Co. v. … Commission, 178 Okla. 375 , 62 P.2d 1027 , is contrary to the rule announced in Fox v. Brown. We do not so construe that authority.

Sebring v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

401 P.2d 479 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 20, 1963

See Barnett v. Kennedy, 185 Okl. 409 , 92 P.2d 963 ; and Tulsa Building & Loan Ass’n v. Leonard, 188 Okl. 562 , 112 P.2d 363 . … Brown v. Eastman National Bank of Newkirk, Okl., 291 P.2d 828 , 55 A.L.R.2d 971 . Therefore this is a matter where the bank has breached its obligation to pay money only.

Speight v. Presley

203 P.3d 173 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 10, 2008

North Side State Bank v. Board of County Commission ers of Tulsa County, 1994 OK 34 , 894 P.2d 1046, 1051 . 114 The district court clerk is both a county officer and an officer or "arm" of the court. Petuskey v. … North Side State Bank v. Board of County Commuission- *179 ers of Tulsa County, 1994 OK 34 , 894 P.2d 1046, 1051 .

STATE ex rel. OKLAHOMA BAR ASSOCIATION v. CLARK

2023 OK 27 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 28, 2023

OKLAHOMA BAR ASSOCIATION v. … Bar Ass'n v. Kinsey , 2009 OK 31 212 P.3d 1186 Id . ¶ 16, 212 P.3d at 1192 (citing State ex rel. Okla. Bar Ass'n v. Doris , 1999 OK 94 991 P.2d 1015 Id . Background Count I: Brown Grievance ¶12 Dennis Brown, Sr.'

MUSTANG RUN WIND PROJECT, LLC v. OSAGE COUNTY BD. OF ADJUSTMENT

2016 OK 113 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 1, 2016

MUSTANG RUN WIND PROJECT, LLC, Plaintiff/Appellee v. OSAGE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, Defendant/Appellant, v. THE OSAGE NATION, Counter-Appellant. … Board of Adjustment , 2002 OK 80, ¶ 11 , 63 P.3d 1, 5 . 32 Sinclair Oil & Gas Co. v. Bishop , 1967 OK 167 , 441 P.2d 436, 447-448 ; Robbins v.

Rogers v. Lassiter, Adm'r.

196 Okla. 228 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 4, 1945

Fairly illustrative of this line of authorities are the cases of Brown v. Durham, 175 Okla. 500 , 53 P. 2d 551 , and Crawford, County Treasurer, et al. v. McConnell et al., 173 Okla. 520 , 49 P. 2d 551 . … into with Brown.

James v. Rogers

734 P.2d 1298 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 18, 1987

Although assuming, without deciding, the Board’s authorization of the amendment was quasi-judicial in character, Meyer v. … See State v. Haden, 349 Mo. 982 , 163 S.W.2d 946 (1942); State v. Meier, 115 N.W.2d 574 (N.D.1962); State v. Bogart, 73 Ohio App. 47 . 53 N.E.2d 75 (1943); In re Welsh, 458 Pa. 645 , 327 A.2d 6 (Pa.1974); Clegg v.

Edmondson v. Siegfried Insurance Agency, Inc.

577 P.2d 72 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 4, 1978

A like conclusion is reached in Cuny v. Annunzio, 411 Ill. 613 , 104 N.E.2d 780, 782 . This Court treats on necessary parties in Ogle v. Ogle, Okl., 517 P.2d 797 . … The statute clearly denominates the Board and the Commission as separate entities in proceedings for judicial review. The appeal is dismissed for the lack of jurisdiction. HODGES, C. J., LAVENDER, V. C.

Linn v. Barnett's Inc.

503 P.2d 1276 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 21, 1972

Most, if not all, of the rolls were wrapped in slick brown paper. … Almost directly west of the second stack there was a three-roll stack, all wrapped in slick brown paper.

State Ex Rel. Kehn v. Incorporated Town of Spavinaw City

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

Riddings, County Attorney, v. … See, also, Board of Commissioners of Cherokee County v. Hatfield, 121 Okla. 28 , 247 Pac. 77 , and Parker v. Board of Commissioners of Tillman County, 41 Okla. 723 , 139 Pac. 981 .

Stearns v. State Ex Rel. Biggers

23 Okla. 462 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 10, 1909

Blodgett v. Board of Canvassers (Sup.) 19 N. Y. … Coll v. Board, 83 Mich. 367 , 47 N. W. 227 Roemer v. Board, 90 Mich. 27 , 51 N. W. 267 . These affidavits are ex parte, and cannot be considered upon this hearing.

Brooks v. Shannon

184 Okla. 255 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 24, 1939

In Cosden v. … In Dunham v.

Ray v. Oklahoma Furn. Mfg. Co.

170 Okla. 414 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 25, 1934

Libbey v. Brown (Me.) 7 Atl. 114 . The court in that case quotes approvingly what is said by Chief Justice Bigelow in Townsend Bank v. … That decision cited Mason v. Henry, 152 N. Y. 529 ; Simpson v. Brown-Desnoyers Shoe Co., 70 Ark. 598 ; Paine v. Dodds, 14 N. D. 189 ; Dielmann v. Citizens’ National Bank, 8 S. D. 263; Capen v. Woodrow, 51 Vt. 106 .

Marland v. Hoffman

184 Okla. 591 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 21, 1939

Board of Com’rs of Seminole County v. State ex rel. Cobb (1912) 31 Okla. 196 , 120 P. 913 ; 18 R. C. L. 126, sec. 39; 38 C. J. 608, sec. 85. … Witt v. Wentz (1930) 142 Okla. 128 , 286 P. 796 ; Purcell-Lexington Toll Bridge Co. v. Leeper (1931) 148 Okla. 27 , 296 P. 969 ; 38 C. J. 582, sec. 56.

Swan v. Wilderson

10 Okla. 547 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 27, 1900

Horn v. Bonafield et al. 39 N. … To the same effect is Byrum et al. v. Peterson et al. 51 N. W. 829; and State ex rel. Cheever v. Johnson et al. 55 N. *555 W. 874; and Chamberlain v. City of Tecumseh, 61 N. W. 632 .

Barker v. State Insurance Fund

40 P.3d 463 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 7, 2001

Manley v. Brown, 1999 OK 79 , 989 P.2d 448, 455 . … Two of our leading cases dealing with whistle-blowing are Vannerson v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma, 1989 OK 125 , 784 P.2d 1053 , which we decided shortly after we created the Burk tort, and Hayes v.

Texas Empire Pipe Line Co. v. Christy

155 Okla. 193 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 23, 1932

Lobert & Klein v. Whitten, 150 Okla. 72 , 300 P. 636 . The testimony shows that claimant paid Dr. Brown for his treatment the sum oi $10. … Walker Motor Co. v. Eastman, 150 Okla. 227 , 1 P. (2d) 640 . Allen v. Elk City Cotton Oil Co., 125 Okla. 142 , 256 P. 898 . In Walker Motor Co. v.