Case law

Grose v. Romero

200 Okla. 330 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 18, 1948

In Re Guardianship of Hight, 194 Okla. 214 , 148 P. 2d 475 , we said: “We are committed to the rule that in order to deprive a parent of the custody of a minor child, the evidence must clearly establish the unfitness of the … established that she was unfit, or that the change of custody was inimical to the welfare of the minors.

Gaines v. Union Central Life Ins. Co.

191 Okla. 246 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 15, 1942

And, by reason of plaintiff’s verified denial that he executed the note and endorsed the check, the burden was on defendant to establish the signatures as those of the plaintiff. 12 O. S. 1941 §286; Rapp v. … We cannot say that its judgment was clearly against the weight of the evidence. This is an action of purely equitable cognizance.

State Ex Rel. Evertson v. Cornett

391 P.2d 277 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 7, 1964

He offered to submit to such a test himself and asked the court to order the wife to submit herself and the child to the tests, at the hands of a qualified expert to be appointed by the court, such test to be made “in the … Witnesses, Sec. 45) unless immunity from prosecution is extended under Article 2, Sec. 27, Oklahoma Constitution.

Smoot v. Baker

194 Okla. 540 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 21, 1944

After the petition was filed the plaintiffs applied to the court for the appointment of a receiver, and a receiver was appointed and qualified. … Inter-Ocean Oil & Gas Co., 52 Okla. 490 , 153 P. 115 , while this power is statutory in Oklahoma, “... in deciding questions arising under this head, the court must look for guidance to the established usages and customs

O'DONOGHUE v. DOOLEY

383 P.3d 773 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 25, 2016

Schill, Property, 225 (6th ed. 2006). 1 The following narrative clearly demonstrates that Erin and David O’Donoghue’s interests in the David L. … C.I.R., 86 F.3d 1045, 1049 (11th Cir. 1996) the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals summarized the purpose for establishing the QTIP: Congress became increasingly concerned with the difficult choice facing those in second marriages

Chrysler Corp. v. Clark

737 P.2d 109 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 5, 1987

In the present case appellant claims the right to establish a new car dealership without submitting to the supervision of OMVC. OMVC clearly has an interest in controverting this proposed erosion of its authority. … The first element is clearly present. Second, the controversy tendered for adjudication must be between parties whose interests are adverse. This element also is clearly present.

Tulsa Area Hospital Council, Inc. v. Oral Roberts University

626 P.2d 316 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 9, 1981

in the area of expertise which the agency supervises. 6 The rationale for this rule is that courts do not possess the specialized knowledge, training, experience or competency to substitute opinions for the judgment of qualified … the Establishment Clause.

In Re Initiative Petition No. 142, State Question No. 205

176 Okla. 155 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 3, 1936

Each qualified elector is entitled to regis *159 ter and vote. … By that section a constitutional inhibition was established in these words : “And, when it is so provided, no person shall vote at any election unless he shall have registered according to law.”

Lowe v. Storozyszyn

183 Okla. 471 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 21, 1938

In the instant case plaintiff has not charged defendants with the commission of specific acts of negligence or of misfeasance, but relies wholly on the nonfeasance of said officers to establish liability. … “This immunity rests upon obvious considerations of public policy, the necessities of the public service and the perplexities and embarrassments of a contrary doctrine.

Wathor v. Mutual Assurance Administrators, Inc.

87 P.3d 559 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 22, 2004

Under the Contract, MAA initially determines whether any particular claim for benefits qualifies for payment under the Plan. … If the court intends to now abandon or abrogate its Christian progeny, its opinion should clearly and explicitly state so.

Court Fund of Tulsa County v. Cook

557 P.2d 875 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 7, 1976

The Board’s deter- *878 initiation is entitled to the same presumption of correctnéss as a judgment and is similarly immune from collateral attack. … Clearly, mandamus lies to compel the performance of a ministerial duty. 12 O.S.1971, § 1451; Ballard v. Christian, Okl., 451 P.2d 943 (1969).

Bramlett v. Luper Transp. Co.

258 P.2d 895 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 21, 1953

Workmen’s Compensation insurance and had not qualified to assume its own risk. … Company, for its failure to carry workmen’s compensation insurance, and its failure to qualify to assume its own risk.

Incorporated Town of Ryan v. Town of Waurika

29 Okla. 655 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 14, 1911

Such location by the Constitutional Convention was temporary, self-enforcing machinery being provided for the relocation thereof by - the respective counties, as is clearly evidenced by the fact that it is provided that after … Assuming the burden of proof, Waurika sought to qualify a list of 264 votes; of these, 19 were not on the poll books, 17 were disqualified, two on the agreed list, and four voted for Ryan, leaving 'the residue, 222 qualified

Tenneco Oil Co. v. El Paso Natural Gas Co.

687 P.2d 1049 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 10, 1984

Our precedents clearly establish that only controversies in the former category may be removed from Art. Ill courts and delegated legislative courts or administrative agencies for their determination. … If the judgment is not clearly against the weight of the evidence, then we should affirm. 19 We have carefully weighed the evidence herein and, although conflicting, find the judgment rendered not clearly against the weight

Mead Brothers v. Watts

135 Okla. 23 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 31, 1928

A properly qualified physician or surgeon or veterinary may state the i>r'esent and probable future effects of a certain occurrence on the body, mind or nervous system of the person' or animal affected, as the case may be … ; but it is not necessary that the facts should be clearly proved.”

Griffin v. Mullinix

68 O.B.A.J. 3102 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 30, 1997

Section 414 clearly shows the legislature’s intent to enforce the provisions of the Occupational Safety & Health Standards Act only against the public employer, except in the most extreme circumstances when the private workplace … Dep’t of Transp., 1980 OK 145 , 618 P.2d 397, 398 (This Court said that any changes in the public policy of governmental immunity would need to come from the legislature and not the Court.); State ex rel.

IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF EVANS

2024 OK 65 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 17, 2024

Later, Joshua Evans filed a motion seeking a court order declaring that Melissa Evan's house qualified for the homestead exemption. … Frances originally established the tract as her "homestead," but deeded the same to Surena in 1902. In 1906, Dora McElhaney, a cousin of the two sisters, began residing on the homestead.

State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Bar Association v. Dobbs

2004 OK 46 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 15, 2004

Clearly, there was a prior relationship between the two men for the mayor to have called respondent in the first place. … was established early in English common law.

Schulte Oil Co. v. Oklahoma Tax Commission

65 O.B.A.J. 3046 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 20, 1994

, which clearly defined the contested exemption’s outer perimeter. … RDL has clearly met the law’s burden for establishing its status qua manufacturer.

MEEKS v. GUARANTEE INSURANCE COMPANY

2017 OK 17 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 28, 2017

"To implement this bargain, the Legislature established the workers' compensation system as the exclusive remedy for employees who suffer accidental on the job injuries. … To hold that a workers' compensation insurer's immunity from tort liability is not coterminous with that of an insured employer's own immunity would indeed abrogate the latter's protection by removing the bargain's very pedestal