Case law

State Ex Rel. Reardon, Co. v. Scales

21 Okla. 683 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Aug 10, 1908

Edwards v. … (See, also, Page v. Board of Supervisors, 85 Cal. 50 . 24 Pac. 607 .)

Carr v. Thompson

27 Okla. 7 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 12, 1910

A similar contention was considered and directly passed upon by the court in the case of Board of County Com’rs of Day County v. … Board of Com’rs. of Garfield County v. Porter et al., 19 Okla. 173 , 92 Pac. 152 .” Being without jurisdiction to consider the errors sought to be presented, the petition in error is dismissed. All the Justices concur.

Ok. St. Afl-Cio v. St. Bd. for Prop. & Cas. Rates

463 P.2d 693 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 6, 1970

Briggs, Plaintiffs in Error, v. STATE BOARD FOR PROPERTY AND CASUALTY RATES, Defendants in Error. OKLAHOMA TRIAL LAWYERS ASSOCIATION, Kenneth R. Nance and the AFL-CIO, Petitioners, v. … STATE BOARD FOR PROPERTY AND CASUALTY RATES, Respondent. Ethyl K. BLEVINS, Jimmy D. Pipkins, Mora Robert Jackson, Don W. Kelly and Bill A. Roderick, Petitioners, v.

Cumbey v. State

699 P.2d 1094 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 7, 1985

In an early case, Rice v. … See, e.g., Sigler v. Lowrie, 404 F.2d 659 (8th Cir.1968) cert. denied 395 U.S. 940 , 89 S.Ct. 2010 , 23 L.Ed.2d 456 (1969); Sims v. Parke Davis & Co., 334 F.Supp. 774 (E.D.Mich.1971); Preston v.

In Re Initiative Petition No. 366, State Question No. 689

73 O.B.A.J. 1106 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 2, 2002

The petition makes an exception for educational institutions subject to rules adopted by the Board of Education and State Board of Regents. 12 Oklahoma's Attorney General, deeming the ballot title proposed by the proponents … In Alexander v.

Lashley v. Moore

112 Okla. 198 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 19, 1925

See, also, Alice Strong, 57 Fed. 249 ; Canty v. Latternar (Minn.) 17 N. W. 385 ; Milmo Nat. Bank v. Convery, 8 Tex. Civ. App. 181 , 27 S. W. 828 ; Bell v. Board of Com. of Lake Co. … In Ingersoll v. Coram, 211 U. S. 335 , 29 Sup. Ct. Rep. 92, at p. 100, opinion by Mr. Justice McKenna, it is said: “In Walker v. Brown, 165 U. S. 654 , 41 L. Ed. 865 , 17 Sup. Ct.

Bilby v. Williams

116 Okla. 4 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 12, 1926

v. … Paragraph No. 1 of the syllabus in Brown v.

Mundy v. Dependent School Dist. No. 32

272 P.2d 447 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 7, 1954

In Hoskins v. … J., JOHNSON, V. C. J., and O’NEAL, WILLIAMS, and BLACKBIRD, JJ., concur. CORN, J., dissents.

Protest of Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co.

164 Okla. 114 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 13, 1933

this case it appears that there was an erroneous deduction from the needs of the fiscal year in the amount of $13,212.72 by reason of anticipated revenue, which is in violation of the rule stated in Adjustment Realty Co. v. … Excise Board, 149 Okla. 70 , 299 P. 207 , and other decisions of this court. That amount was in excess of the amount o£ surplus found to exist.

Wallace v. McClendon

144 Okla. 39 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 17, 1930

Under this condition the rule of law announced in the cases of Thompson v. Board of Com’rs, Delaware Co., 56 Okla. 79 , 155 Pac. 881 ; Delaware County v. Board of Com’rs., 56 Okla. 81 , 155 Pac. 881 ; Drummond v. … City of Ada, 86 Okla. 32 , 206 Pac. 200 ; Arinwine v. Sawner, 112 Okla. 252 , 240 Pac. 1042 ; Town of Covington v. Coberly, 136 Okla. 20 , 275 Pac. 1064 ; State ex rel. Freeman v.

Oden v. Russell

207 Okla. 570 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 18, 1952

Defendants predicate their contention of error in the assessment of exemplary damages upon their assumed premise that there was no proof of actual damages, and cite cases including Brown v. … Defendants cite Keener Oil & Gas Co. v. Stewart, 172 Okla. 143 , 45 P. 2d 121 ; Galt-Brown Co. v. Lay, 183 Okla. 87 , 80 P. 2d 567 ; Pure Oil Co. v.

Northeast Okl. Elec. v. Corp. Com'n

808 P.2d 680 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 19, 1991

that a "final contract" had been executed between GRDA and the Board. … City of Tulsa v. Chamblee, 188 Okl. 94 , 106 P.2d 796 (1940) (the court's syllabus ¶ 1); Lawrence v.

House v. Musick

185 Okla. 264 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 28, 1939

Ann. sec. 103), to remove school board members for causes enumerated in the statute. See School District No. 20 v. Walden, 146 Okla. 19 , 293 P. 199 ; Akin v. … In the case of School District No. 20 v.

Jones v. Webb

180 Okla. 6 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 22, 1936

This is, in a sense, a companion case to Jones v. Webb, 180 Okla. 5 , 67 P. (2d) 800 , and involves 'an account of the plaintiff incurred in boarding a number of oil we’l employees in a drilling venture wherein N. E. … Robinson v. Mulder, 81 Mich. 75 , 45 N. W. 505 . In Whitcomb v.

Incorporated Town of Valliant v. Mills

28 Okla. 811 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 9, 1911

Miller, township trustees composing the township board for municipal township No. 5 of McCurtain county, Oklahoma, and ex officio highway commissioners, for the said municipal township No. 5 and for road district No. 2, of … Co. v. Willcox et al., Com’rs, 94 N. E. 212 .)

Ottawa County Nat. Bank v. Bouldin

117 Okla. 104 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 22, 1925

Board of Com’rs of Garfield County v. Beauchamp, 18 Okla. 1 , 88 Pac. 1124 ; Berry v. Barton, 12 Okla. 221 , 71 Pac. 1074 ; Morrill v. Casper et al., 13 Okla. 335 , 73 Pac. 1102 ; Rogers v. … Brown, 15 Okla. 524 , 86 Pac. 443 ; Carl et al. v. Oklahoma Woolen Mills, 16 Okla. 515 , 86 Pac. 66 ; Cates v. Miles, 67 Okla. 195 , 169 Pac. 888 ; Cabell v. McLish, 61 Okla. 224 , 160 Pac. 592 ; Campbell v.

Barnes v. Oklahoma Transportation Company

318 P.2d 455 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 29, 1957

National Tank Co. v. Scott, 191 Okl. 613 , 130 P.2d 316 . In the case of Johnson v. … at approximate spot where plaintiff purportedly boarded bus.

Public Service Co. v. B. Willis, C.P.A., Inc.

68 O.B.A.J. 2213 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 24, 1997

McCrady v. Western Farmers Electric Cooperative, supra; Arthur v. Board of Com’rs of Choctaw County, 43 Okl. 174 , 141 P. 1 (Okl.1914); City of Tulsa v. Williams, 100 Okl. 116 , 227 P. 876 (Okl.1924); Sublett v. … Arthur v. Board of Com’rs., supra; Luccock v. City of Norman, supra.

Mayfield v. Bradley and Burris

6 Okla. 547 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 2, 1897

of and fully set forth in the case of Gray v. … The case as brought here does, in fact, make the principles and reasoning in Gray v.

Wells v. Webb

772 P.2d 400 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 18, 1989

Owners of land abutting a section line may have the section line declared “reserved section line”, only after public notice at the expense of the movant and subsequent resolution of the Board of County Commissioners. … In Siegenthaler v.