Case law

Thomas v. Wagoner

197 Okla. 662 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 12, 1946

In said primary, both of said candidates received the same number of votes, and the county election board then proceeded to select Wagoner as the winner, by lot. … Title 11, § 23b; Constitution of Oklahoma, art. 23, § 10; Allison v. Massey, 108 Okla. 140 , 235 P. 192 ; Whaley v. Cotton, 114 Okla. 274 , 246 P. 629 . The judgment of the trial court is therefore reversed.

Oklahoma Natural Gas Corp. v. Blake

133 Okla. 13 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 2, 1928

of 13.71 mills, and that the excessive mil age levied and collected resulted from the fact that the balance sheet of the estimate approved by the excise board did not reflect the true financial condition of the county on … No 'extended discussion of the question here presented is necessary for the reason that it has recently been determined by this court adversely to plaintiff's contention in the case of Albrecht v. Jones, Co.

Community Bankers Ass'n of Oklahoma v. Consolidated Equity Corp.

70 O.B.A.J. 2236 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 13, 1999

. ¶ 2 This precise issue was recently decided by this Court in Community Bankers Association of Oklahoma v. … Consolidated Equity, et al. 92,061 Community Bankers Assn. v.

Musick v. School Dist. No. 41

186 Okla. 371 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 23, 1940

Jumper v. Lyles, Co. Supt., 77 Okla. 57 , 185 P. 1084 ; State ex rel. Gumm v. Albritton, 98 Okla. 158 , *373 224 P. 511 ; School Dist. No. 7, Muskogee Co., v. Hunnicutt, 51 Fed. 2d 528. … Ratliff v. State, 79 Okla. 152 , 191 P. 1038 . That decision was predicated upon section 7899, R.

Application of Oklahoma Capitol Improvement Auth.

410 P.2d 46 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 25, 1966

, and that sale of the bonds by the State Treasurer should be by and with the direction of the State Budget Director and the State Depository Board. … JACKSON, V. C. J, and BLACKBIRD, IRWIN and HODGES, JJ, dissent.

Wilkins, Drainage Com'r v. Hillman Com'rs.

45 Okla. 451 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 22, 1914

Ed. 569 ]; Irrigation Dist. v. Bradley, 164 U. S. 112 -175, 17 Sup. Ct. 56 [ 41 L. Ed. 369 ]; Stuart v. Palmer, 74 N. Y. 189 [ 30 Am. Rep. 289 ]; Remsen v. Wheeler, 105 N. Y. 573 [ 12 N. E. 564 ].” … W. 500 ; Dyar v. Farmington Village Corp., 70 Me. 527 ; Hanscom v. City of Omaha, 11 Neb. 37 , 7 N. W. 739 ; Erie v. Russell, 148 Pa. 384 , 23 Atl. 1102 .

Mills v. Grotheer

69 O.B.A.J. 1425 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 14, 1998

Colorado Permanente Medical Group, 902 P.2d 867, 874 (Colo.Ct.App.1995) (expert’s position on board of directors of defendant’s insurer made it more probable that he was biased); Golden v. … ,” Evans, 902 P.2d at 874 , see also Barsema, 751 P.2d at 973 (expert’s position as vice president and member of board); 2) the fact that the witness is an employee of defendant’s insurer, see Charter v.

S. J. Groves & Sons Co. v. Oklahoma City

191 Okla. 276 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 22, 1942

Co. v. Read, 182 Okla. 103 , 77 P. 2d 26 ; State ex rel. H. F. Wilcox Oil & Gas Co. v. Walker, 168 Okla. 543 , 35 P. 2d 269 ; Equalization Board of Oklahoma County v. … Co. v. State Highway Commission, 165 Okla. 288 , 25 P. 2d 783 ; Allen v. Board of County Com’rs of Logan County, 131 *278 Okla. 41, 267 P. 860 ; Board of Com’rs of Seminole County v. State ex rel.

INTERN ASS'N OF FIREFIGHTERS v. Thorpe

632 P.2d 408 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 28, 1981

Board of City Commissioners, or more than one designated representative of the Board. … McCord, 245 Ark. 401 , 432 S.W.2d 753 (1968); Board of Public Instruction v. Doran, 224 So.2d 693 (Fla. 1969); Bagby v.

Fisher v. Dixon

188 Okla. 7 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 24, 1940

In support of the defendant’s position, his counsel cite expressions from Woodruff v. Brady, 181 Okla. 105 , 72 P. 2d 709 , 113 A. L. R. 391; Anthis v. … See Tyler v. Wilhite, 97 Okla. 159 , 222 P. 997 ; Ray v. Brush, 112 Kan. 110 , 210 P. 660 ; Heard v. Pratt (Tex. Civ. App.) 257 S. W. 660 ; Summers, Oil & Gas, chap. 15, §§ 451, 470.

Lusk v. White

68 Okla. 316 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 11, 1916

Burgess v. K. C., St. J. & C. B. R. Co., 145 Mo. 596 , 47 S. W. 500 ; Board of County Com’rs v. Peter, 253 Mo. 520 , 161 S. W. 1155 , Ann. Cas. 1915C, 310; Fremont, etc., Ry. Co. v. Pennington County, 20 S. … Board of County Commissioners et al. v. Alexander, 58 Okla. 128 , 159 Pac. 311 ; State v. Prairie Oil & Gas Co., 64 Okla. 267 , 167 Pac. 756 .

Easton v. Broadwell

8 Okla. 442 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Aug 24, 1899

(McCallum v. Lambie, 145 Mass. 236 , 13 N. E. 899 .) There is no appeal from an order like that which was made in the court below, unless specifically provided by the statute. (Brown v. Rice, 30 Neb. 236 , 46 N. … W. 489 ; Duff v. Duff, 71 Cal. 513 , 12 Pac. 570 ; Fleitas v. Richardson, 147 U. S. 538 , 13 Sup. Ct. 429.) The appeal will therefore be dismissed All of the Justices concurring.

City of Shawnee v. Exchange National Co.

185 Okla. 451 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 26, 1939

In the case of First National Bank in Wichita v. … WELCH, V. C. J., dissents. RILEY, J., absent.

Choctaw, O. W. R. Co. v. Castanien

23 Okla. 735 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 12, 1909

Co., v. Plunkett, 25 Kan. 188 ; Tobei v. Brown, 20 Kan. 14 . … Ct. 63 ; Bradley v. N. Y. & N. H. Ry. Co., 21 Conn. 293 ; Buhl v. Front St. Co., 98 Mich. 569 , 57 N. W. 829 , 23 L. R. A. 392. Paraphrasing a portion of the opinion in Scrutchfield v. Choctaw, etc., Ry.

Chestnut Smith v. Lynch

84 Okla. 199 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 6, 1921

This court, in the case of Wilson Lumber Co. v. … Blue v. Board of County Commissioners of Garvin County, 82 Okla. 178 , 198 Pac. 851 .

Wakeman v. Peter

52 Okla. 639 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 19, 1915

In Greer v. … S.) 308, and Shipman v. Brown, 36 Okla. 623 , 130 Pac. 603 . But an action on a judgment is not an action on a contract, express or implied, within the meaning of these words as used in the statute. In Morley v.

Wellston Consolidated School District No. 1 v. Matthews

104 Okla. 185 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 20, 1924

Provided, further, that the school board may I>rovide motor transportation for pupils as provided in this Act, which may be either hired or purchased by the school board of said consolidated district.” … And the portion which is especial1 v ner-tinent in this cause is. that which provides : “And in addition it shall lie the duty of said district board to provide!

In Re Application of State

33 Okla. 797 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 15, 1912

Frankton, 142 Ind. 546 , 41 N.E. 1031 ; Board of Commissioners of Perry Co. v. Gardner, 155 Ind. 165 , 57 N.E. 908 ; Grant v. City of Davenport, 36 Iowa, 396 ; French et al. v. … Joseph Waterworks Co., 57 Or. 586 , 111 P. 864 , 112 P. 1083 ; Brown v. City of Corry, 175 Pa. 528 , 34 A. 854 ; Dallas Elect. Co. v. Dallas, 23 Tex. Civ. App. 323 , 58 S.W. 153 ; Tyler v.

Adams v. Adams

30 Okla. 327 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 18, 1911

Reavis v. Reavis, 1 Scam. (Ill.) 242; Deenis v. Deenis, 79 Ill. 74 ; Spitler v. Spitler, 108 Ill. 120 ; Edwards v. Edwards, 84 *332 Ala. 361, 3 South. 896 ; McDonald v. McDonald, 117 Iowa, 307 , 90 N. … In Brown v. Brown, 38 Ark. 324 , cited and approved in Ecker v.

BEASON v. I. E. MILLER SERVICES, INC.

441 P.3d 1107 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 23, 2019

Macy v. Bd. of Cty. Comm'rs of Cty. of Oklahoma , 1999 OK 53 , ¶ 14, 986 P.2d 1130 , 1138 ; Tate v. … (citing Guthrie Daily Leader v. Cameron , 1895 OK 71 , 41 P. 635 ); see also Chickasha Cotton Oil Co. v.