Case law

Yarbrough v. Donaldson

67 Okla. 318 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 12, 1918

Mayor and Councilmen of City of Pawhuska v. Pawhuska Oil & Gas Co. et al., 28 Okla. 663 , 115 Pac. 353 . … Brazell et al. v.

Tulsa Professional Collection Services, Inc. v. Pope

61 O.B.A.J. 3191 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 27, 1990

In Mennonite Board of Missions v. Adams 15 the Court continued refining Mullane. There, mortgagees received notice of a tax sale by publication alone. … Department of Highways v. Brown 24 finally led to legislative amendments of the pertinent condemnation statutes.

OKLAHOMA CALL FOR REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE v. DRUMMOND

2023 OK 24 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 21, 2023

City of New York , 487 U.S. 1 (1988); and the 1987 ruling, Board of Directors of Rotary International v. … Waring is also known for laying the ground work for the United States Supreme Court to decide Brown v. Board of Education , 347 U.S. 483 (1954).

State ex rel. Tuxhorn v. District Court of Woodward County

464 P.2d 758 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 4, 1969

Oklahoma Natural Gas Co. v. Hughes, 204 Okl. 134 , 227 P.2d 666 ; Yocahm v. County Election Board, 198 Okl. 588 , 180 P.2d 831 ; Butler v. Breckinridge, Okl., 442 P.2d 313 . … J., BERRY, V. C. J., and DAVISON, BLACKBIRD, HODGES, LAVENDER and McINERNEY, JJ., concur.

Ervin v. Seikel

189 Okla. 682 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 7, 1941

Treas., v. … See, also, Jumper v. Lyles, 77 Okla. 57 , 185 P. 1084 and State ex rel. Gumm v. Albritton, 98 Okla. 158 , 224 P. 511 .

Nash v. Hiller

398 P.2d 817 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 2, 1965

In Nash v. … Swink v. Colcord, 10 Cir., 239 F.2d 518 ; Maben v.

Farrimond v. Coalgate School District

25 Okla. 707 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 8, 1910

Upon the authority of Thompson et al. v. Haskell, Governor, 24 Okla. 70 , 102 Pac. 700 , this question must be answered in the negative. In that ease Mr. Justice Williams, in distinguishing it from Kellogg v. … School District, 13 Okla. 285 , 74 Pac. 110 , and cases of that class, says: “The case of Kellogg v.

Oklahoma-Arkansas Telephone Co. v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.

143 Okla. 76 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 29, 1930

In Pioneer Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. … In Pioneer Telephone & Telegraph Co. v.

Walker v. Tyner

95 Okla. 120 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 10, 1923

Brown has gone o~ver? … In'¡Brown v.

Heard v. Sullivan

280 P.2d 708 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 23, 1955

Heard v. Sullivan, Judge, decided Feb. 12, 1952, the opinion therein being reported in 206 Okl. 43 , 240 P.2d 1109 . … Heard v. Sullivan, supra, the writ herein sought is granted and the syllabus in that case and the 3rd paragraph in the syllabus of State v.

Resh, Inc. v. Oklahoma Electric Cooperative, Inc.

516 P.2d 803 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 3, 1973

The term “license” as used by plaintiffs is in accord with language of this court in Town of Gans v. … The defendant urges that it acquired a franchise and vested property rights by the Resolution action of the Board of County Commissioners, and cites the ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States in Russell v.

Curtis v. Barby

366 P.2d 616 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 24, 1961

See Littlefield v. Brown, supra. To hold the rule of procedure as set forth in Wood v. … Brown in 1918 to the promulgation of Wood v. Speakman in 1931, which followed the procedure set forth in Littlefield v. Brown.

Grand River Dam Authority v. State

645 P.2d 1011 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 11, 1982

Hillcrest Medical Center v. Lee, Okl., 575 P.2d 971 [1978]; Office of the Governor —Dept. of Industrial Dev. v. Dalton, Okl., 560 P.2d 971 [1977]; State ex rel. Director of Alcoholic Beverage Control Board v. … Corp. v. Board of Tax-Roll Cor. of Tulsa County, Okl., 510 P.2d 680 [1973]. 19 .Revised Model Administrative Procedure Act § 1(7), Comment, 14 U.L.A.Civil Proc. 357. 20 . State v.

St. Louis-S. F. Ry. Co. v. Bailey, Co.

125 Okla. 183 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 24, 1927

The plaintiff filed its petition in the district court in which is challenged the legality of a levy of 2.75 mills for the county highway fund, which levy was in excess of the levy made by the county excise board for current … of'Craig county,’relating to the county highway fund, and the exact question here involved was decided in an opinion by this court against the'contentions of 'the plaintiff in the case of Wirt Franklin v.

In Re Garland

52 Okla. 585 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 23, 1915

In Walker v. Board of County Commissioners of Grant County, 44 Okla. 350 , 144 Pac. 793 , Harrison, C., said: . … In Morris v.

SHELLEM v. GRUNEWELD

2023 OK 26 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 28, 2023

Murlin v. Pearman , 2016 OK 47 371 P.3d 1094 Dowell v. … Corbeil v.

State Ex Rel. Crawford v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of America

69 O.B.A.J. 469 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 3, 1998

Texas County Irrigation and Water Resources Association v. Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1990 OK 121 ¶ 6 , 803 P.2d 1119 . … Wolfberg, supra, note 3 at 899; Wright v. Grove Sun Newspaper Company, Inc., supra, note 3 at 987; Tate v. Browning-Ferris, supra, note 3 at 1225. [35] See Southeastern Oklahoma Development and Gas Authority v.

Territory of Oklahoma Ex Rel. Taylor v. School District No. 83

10 Okla. 556 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 8, 1901

. *561 It was said in Clark v. … It was held in Morrison v. Bachect, 112 Pa.

Bank of Quapaw v. Flint

97 Okla. 181 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 12, 1924

Stat. 1921), and the cases of Farmers State Guaranty Bank v. Cromwell, 70 Oklahoma, 175 Pac. 826 ; Wilkin Hale v. Herstein, 48 Okla. 268 , 149 Pac. 1109 ; Crawford v. Boston Store Mercantile Co., 67 Mo. … App. 39 , and Western National Bank of New York v. Armstrong, 38 U. S. (Law Ed.) 470, in support of this contention and calls special attention to the case of Farmers State Guaranty Bank v.

Nichols v. Jackson

73 O.B.A.J. 1997 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 27, 2002

of the governing board. … Nichols v.