Case law

Alexander v. Wright

135 Okla. 96 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 5, 1929

Kelley, Board of Trustees.” … In Nix v.

Jack v. National Bank

17 Okla. 430 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 6, 1906

In Methven v. … , or to the board of county commissioners of the assignment to the bank.

In Re Initiative Petition No. 23, State Question No. 38

35 Okla. 49 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 8, 1912

Co. v. Canter, 1 Pet. 511 [7 L. Ed. 242]; Benner v. Porter, 8 How. 235 [ 13 L. Ed. 119 ]; United States v. Ferreira, 13 How. 40 [ 14 L. Ed. 42 ]. … Such is the holding' of the Supreme Court of the Territory of Oklahoma in the case of Watkins v. Havighorst, 13 Okla. 128 , 74 Pac. 318 , following the case of Board of Education v.

Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. Guthridge

72 Okla. 190 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 13, 1919

Co. v. Ray, 67 Okla. 77 , 168 Pac. 999 ; Delk v. St. L. & S. F. Ry. Co., 220 U. S. 589 , 31 Sup. Ct. 617, 55 L. Ed. 590 ; St Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Ry. Co. v. Taylor, Adm’x, 210 U. S. 281 , 28 Sup. … Co. v. Brown, 229 U. S. 320 , S3 Sup. Ct. 840, 57 L. Ed. 1204 . We are unable to perceive the analogy between these cases and the case at bar.

State Ex Rel. Dunlop, State Treas. v. Cruce

31 Okla. 486 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 12, 1912

The leading case of this class is Sutherland v. Governor, 29 Mich. 320 , 18 Am. Rep. 89 . People ex rel. Broderick v. Morton, 156 N. Y. 136, 50 N. E. 791 , 41 L. R. A. 231, 66 Am. St. … In Betts v.

Murray County v. Hood

163 Okla. 167 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 25, 1933

In Board of Trustees of Crutcho Township v. … J„ OULLISON, V. C. J., and SWINDALL. ANDREWS, McNEILL, OSBORN, and BUSBY, JJ., concur. BAYLESS, J., absent.

In re Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma

427 P.2d 429 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 28, 1966

In Crossett v. … See also Knox v. McMillan, Old., 272 P.2d 1040 .

Walters v. Weaver

204 Okla. 72 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 12, 1950

Citing Core v. Smith, 23 Okla. 909 , 102 P. 114 . … In the early case of Cordray v.

State Ex Rel. Pollution Control Co. v. Kerr-McGee Corp.

532 P.2d 1386 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 18, 1975

See Commonwealth v. Emmers, 221 Pa. 298 , 70 A. 762 (1908); Cooper v. State, 48 N.Y.S.2d 212 (Ct.Cl.1944); 32 A.L.R.3rd 215, 255. In Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. v. … Board of Governors of Registered Dentists v. Melton, 428 P.2d 205, 207 (Okl.1967). We believe the statute in question conforms with the standards of due process.

School District No. 84 v. Asher School Dist. No. 112

168 Okla. 282 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 1, 1934

In the case of Nichols v. … In the case of Curtiss v.

Consolidated Alfalfa Milling Co. v. Winsor

40 Okla. 362 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 3, 1914

Stein, 43 Kan. 35 , 22 Pac. 1020 ; Simpson v. Kirschbaum & Co., 43 Kan. 36 , 22 Pac. 1018 ; Brown v. Kimble, 5 Kan. 80 ; Dolbec v. Hoover, 8 Kan. 124 ; Edenfield v. Barnhart, 5 Kan. 225 ; Simpson v. … Rothchild et al., 43 Kan. 33 , 22 Pac. 1019 ; Kansas Rolling Mill Co. v. Bovard, 34 Kan. 21 , 7 Pac. 622 .

State Bar v. Retail Credit Ass'n

170 Okla. 246 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 27, 1934

In Board v. … In Allopathic State Board of Medical Examiners v.

State Ex Rel. Gauntt v. Lasher

116 Okla. 273 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 9, 1926

Love v. Smith, 43 Okla. 231 , 142 Pac. 408 ; Ross et al. v. Hunter et al., 53 Okla. 423 , 157 Pac. 85 . … It is undisputed, as shown by plaintiff’s petition, that said six votes were duly certified to the election board. As held in Town of Grove v.

Anchor Steam Bottling Works v. Baumle

53 Okla. 103 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 8, 1916

That being the case, no formal action of the board of directors was necessary, and, if it was, by attorning to plaintiff the board was properly presumed to have ratified the deed. Union Pac. Ry. Co. v. Chicago, R. … Y.) 553; Independent Brewing Co. v. Powers, 80 Ill. App. 471 ; German Nat. Bank v. First Nat. Bank, 59 Neb. 7 , 80 N. W. 48 ; Mobile, etc., Ry. Co. v. Owen, 121 Ala. 505 , 25 South. 612 ; St. Croix Lbr. Co. v.

Chapman v. Draughons School of Business, Inc.

287 P.2d 903 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 5, 1955

Keaton v. Bonaparte, 174 Okl. 316 , 50 P.2d 404 .” Lairmore v. Board of County Com’rs, Okmulgee County, 200 Okl. 436 , 195 P.2d 762, 764 . The quoted rule has always been followed in this jurisdiction. … Smith v. Board of Com’rs, 26 Okl. 819 , 110 P. 669 ; Garvin County v. Lindsay Bridge Co., 32 Okl. 784 , 124 P. 324 ; Fast v. Rogers, 30 Okl. 289 , 119 P. 241 ; Harris v. Smiley, 36 Okl. 89 , 128 P. 276 ; Turner v.

Pentagon Academy, Inc. v. Independent School District No. 1 of Tulsa County

74 O.B.A.J. 3303 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 25, 2003

See, Dabney v. … Anson Corp. v.

Alsip v. City of Chandler

408 P.2d 512 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 2, 1965

In Driver v. … See also Excise Board of Oklahoma County v. Board of Education of Oklahoma City, 178 Okl. 545 , 61 P.2d 693 , 62 P.2d 986 . The case of Dowler v. State ex rel.

Cornelius v. Frank

173 Okla. 425 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 10, 1935

A provision of similar import was under consideration in Walker et al. v. Brown, 43 Okla. 144 , 141 P. 681 , and this court there held that: "The phrase, 'prevented by law,’ as used in that part of section 8341, Rev. … In Blundell v.

Johnson v. Stoval

44 Okla. 443 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 22, 1914

In the former opinion, we followed Barnard v. … Held reversible error, overruling Brown v. Yates, 24 Okla. 231 , 103 Pac. 667 .” In this case the court overruled the opinion in Brown v. Yates because it seemed to follow the case of Baldwin v. White (Tex. Civ.

Saxon v. National Surety Co.

129 Okla. 300 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 6, 1928

Shipman, Adm’r, v. Brown, 36 Okla. 623 , 130 Pac. 603 . … Brown v. Trent, 36 Okla. 239 , 128 Pac. 895 . The finding of the court, above quoted, in the action against the surety, is of fraud of such nature.