Case law

Atwater v. Hassett

27 Okla. 292 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 26, 1910

State ex rel. v. Hooker, County Judge, 22 Okla. 712 , 98 Pac. 964 ; Rea, County Clerk, v. Board of County Com’rs., infra. … In Patterson v.

Apple v. State Insurance Fund

540 P.2d 545 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 10, 1975

Thus these circumstances justify application of the “old” rule, typified by Brown & Root v. … Fox v. Brown, 176 Okl. 201 , 55 P.2d 129 .

St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. Isenberg

48 Okla. 51 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 1, 1915

(Stickler v. Gitchel, 14 Okla. 523 , 78 Pac. 94 ; Kuhl v. Supreme Lodge, 18 Okla. 383 , 89 Pac. 1126 ; McMaster v. City Nat. Bank, 23 Okla. 550 , 301 Pac. 1103 [ 138 Am. St. Rep. 831 ]; Armstrong Byrd & Co. v. … V. R. Co. v. Bailey, 34 Okla. 193 , 124 Pac. 987 ; St. L. & S. F. R. Co. v. Lee, 37 Okla. 545 , 132 Pac. 1072 , 46 L. R. A. (N. S.) 357.

First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n, Chickasha, Oklahoma v. Nath

63 O.B.A.J. 2649 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 15, 1992

Sharum, 21 Okl. 863 , 97 P. 555, 556 (1908); Board of Com’rs of D County v. Wright, 8 Okl. 190 , 57 P. 203 (syllabus ¶3) (1899). 31 . … See, e.g., Sinclair Prairie Pipe Line Co. v. Excise Board, 173 Okl. 375 , 49 P.2d 114, 119 (1935); Protest of Kansas City Southern Ry. Co., 157 Okl. 246 , 11 P.2d 500, 504 (1932). But see Choctaw County Excise Board v.

Pitchford v. Blanchard

503 P.2d 1270 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 3, 1972

In Davis v. Foley, 60 Okl. 87 , 159 P. 646 , we held that an action may be maintained upon a judgment, although the judgment creditor has the right to issue execution thereon. … In discussing the Davis case in Board of Education of City of Drumright v.

Adwon v. Ketcham

169 Okla. 428 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 16, 1934

Wilkinson v. Stone, 82 Okla. 296 , 200 P. 196 ; Miller et al. v. Gregory et al., 132 Okla. 48 , 269 P. 303 ; Home Ins. Co. of New York v. Whitchurch, 139 Okla. 1 , 281 P. 234 . … Chestnut v. Worley et al., 164 Okla. 153 , 23 P. (2d) 196 ; Melton v. Whitney et al., 164 Okla. 220 , 23 P. (2d) 660 ; McKay v. Kelly, 130 Okla. 62 , 264 P. 814 ; Cull v. Cavanaugh, 95 Okla. 157 , 218 P. 299 ; Thomas v.

Howe v. Hall

76 Okla. 41 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 30, 1919

It was held in the ease of Brown v. … Surety Co. v. Turnham, 58 Okla. 583 , 160 Pac. 468 ; Williams v. Kelly, 71 Oklahoma, 176 Pac. 204 ; Callahan v. Callahan, 47 Okla. 542 , 149 Pac. 135 .

Smith v. Oklahoma City Bldg. & Loan Ass'n

179 Okla. 9 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 18, 1936

Julian Oil & Royalties Co. v. … Fornataro v. Atl. Coast, etc., Ass’n, 163 A. 240 . 10 N. J. Misc. 1248, and Stone v. Schiller B. & L. Ass’n, 302 Pa. 544 , 153 A. 758 . In the last-named case the early case of U. S. B. & L. Ass’n v.

Eureka Reserve Life Insurance v. Glazner

115 Okla. 180 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 8, 1925

In Fullenwider v. Royal League, 180 Ill. 621 , 54 N. … In Steen v. Modern Woodman of America, 17 A. L. R. 406, citing Fullenwider v. Royal League, supra, the identical language was used. In Hobbs v. Association (Iowa) 47 N.

McCormick v. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co.

84 Okla. 54 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 29, 1921

In the case of Brown v. M. K. & T. Ry. Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 69 S. … Co. v. Brown (Tex. Civ. App.) 173 S. W. 943 .

Zachary v. City of Wagoner

146 Okla. 268 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 30, 1930

In the case of City of Sapulpa v. … City of Spokane (Wash.) 41 Pac. 888 ; Faulkner v. City of Seattle (Wash.) 53 Pac. 365 ; Joliet v. Alexander (Ill.) 62 N. E. 861 ; East Moline v. Pope (Ill.) 79 N.

Driver v. City of Tulsa

292 P.2d 426 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 20, 1955

The terms of the charter are a proper subject of judicial notice. 11 O.S.1951 § 560; City of Ardmore v. Excise Board, 155 Okl. 126 , 8 P.2d 2 . … The particular statutes involved, had been changed somewhat since the decision in Oklahoma City v.

Hensley v. Conard

99 Okla. 173 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 13, 1924

Comanche Ice & Fuel Co. v. Binder & Hillery, 70 Okla. 28 172 Pac. 629 ; Uncle Sam Oil Co. v. Richards, 73 Oklahoma, 175 Pac. 749 ; Deming Inv. Co. v. Shannon, 62 Okla. 277 , 162 Pac. 471 ; Cressler v. … Brown, 79 Okla. 170 , 192 Pac. 417 ; Johnson v. Gillette, 66 Okla. 308 , 168 Pac. 1031 ; Brown v. Calvert, 57 Okla. 364 , 157 Pac. 284 .

Montgomery v. State Industrial Commission

190 Okla. 439 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 14, 1942

Board of Commissioners, etc., v. Sims, 166 Okla. 298 , 27 P. 2d 633 , and cases there cited. … Such was the rule applied in Board of Commissioners v. Sims, above.

Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Eldredge

65 Okla. 317 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 24, 1917

Smith v. Board of Com’rs, 26 Okla. 819 , 110 Pac. 669 ; Garvin County v. Lindsay Bridge Co., 32 Okla. 784 , 124 Pac. 324 ; Fast et al. v. Rogers, County Treasurer, 30 Okla., 289 , 119 Pac. 241 ; Turner et al. v. … Williams v. Garfield Ex. Bank, 38 Okla. 539 , 134 Pac. 863 ; Board of Com’rs v. Tinklepaugh, 49 Okla. 440 , 152 Pac. 1119 , and cases cited; Mellon Co. v. McCafferty, 239 U. S. 134 , 36 Sun. Ct. 94, 60 L. Ed. 181 .

IN RE AMENDMENT OF RULE 1.21 OF OKLAHOMA SUPREME COURT RULES

2021 OK 41 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 28, 2021

Letteer v. Conservancy District No. 30, 1963 OK 218 , 385 P.2d 796, 802 . (c) County Excise Board Budget Setting Appeals. … Letteer v. Conservancy District No. 30, 1963 OK 218 , 385 P.2d 796, 802 . (c) County Excise Board Budget Setting Appeals.

In Re Hays

189 Okla. 386 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 30, 1941

The record in this case sustains the findings made by the board. … J., CORN, V. C. J., and RILEY, OSBORN, BAYLESS, GIBSON, HURST, and DAVISON, JJ., concur.

Dumas v. Conyer

448 P.2d 835 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 26, 1968

Secrest v. Williams (1939), 185 Okl. 449 , 94 P.2d 252 ; Midwest City v. Eckroat (1963), Okl., 387 P.2d 123 . … Murdock v. Loeffelholz (1966), Okl, 421 P.2d 236 .

South Oklahoma Town Co. v. Acree

166 Okla. 110 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 31, 1933

Pine v. State Industrial Commission, 108 Okla. 185 , 235 P. 617 ; Rorabaugh-Brown Dry Goods Co. v. Mathews, 162 Okla. 283 , 20 P. (2d) 141 ; Tulsa Terminal Storage & Transfer Co. v. … Thomas, 162 Okla. 5 , 18 P. (2d) 891 ; Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea *111 Co. v. McHan, 162 Okla. 8 , 18 P. (2d) 875 ; Spivey & McGill v. Nixon, 163 Okla. 278 , 21 P. (2d) 1049 .

Missouri, O. & G. Ry. Co. v. Adams

52 Okla. 557 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 23, 1915

Gowen v. Bush, 76 Fed. 349 , 22 C. C. A. 196 ; Fredenthal v. Brown & McCabe, 52 Or. 33 , 95 Pac. 1116 ; L. & N. R. Co. v. Pearson, Adm’r, 97 Ala. 211 , 12 South. 176 .” *562 In the case of the City of Wynnewood v. … Durkee v. Central Pac. R. R. Co., supra; Fredenthal v. Brown, supra; Havens v. R. I., etc., R. R. Co., 26 E. I. 48, 58 Atl. 247 , 3 Ann. Gas. 617, and note page 621.