Case law

Campbell v. Reynolds

167 Okla. 365 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 20, 1934

Reynolds to vacate the office-of member of the board of education of the-city of Maud from ward 2 of said city. … City of Sapulpa v. Harris, Judge, 143 Okla. 69 , 287 P. 1041 ; Parker v. U. S. Smelter Co., 80 Okla. 129 , 194 P. 897 . The appeal is therefore dismissed

Bagby v. Trustees of the Claremore Junior College Authority

525 P.2d 1355 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 14, 1974

The acceptance of the beneficial interest in the trust was made by the Board of County Commissioners of Rogers County. … Eberle v. State ex rel. Department of Highways (1963), Okl., 385 P.2d 868 ; and Edwards v. Hanna Lumber *1357 Company (1966), Okl., 415 P.2d 980 .

Hartley v. Riley

85 Okla. 101 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 21, 1922

This principle of law is stated in the ease of Colonial Jewelry Company v. Brown et al., 38 Okla. 44 , 131 Pac. 1077 . … To the same effect are Kelly v. Brown, 55 Okla. 628 , 155 Pac. 590 ; Haizlip v. Whitfield, 56 Okla. 42 , 155 Pac. 863 ; Gilkeson v. Callahan, 62 Okla. 45 , 161 Pac. 789 ; Falls City Clothing Co. v.

Bilby v. Cochran

47 Okla. 545 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 4, 1915

BROWN, J. Suit was instituted in the district court by defendants in error against plaintiff in error, N. V. Bilby, upon a promissory note. The petition was styled “G. C. Cochran and C. W. … V. Bilby.”

Hargrove v. Bourne

47 Okla. 484 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 1, 1915

Dudley, 65 Ala. 68 ; Shahan v. Herzberg, 73 Ala. 59 ; Brown v. Cairns, 107 Iowa, 727 , 77 N. W. 478 ; Armour Packing Co. v. Des Moines Packing Co., 116 Iowa, 723 , 89 N. W. 196 , 93 Am. St. Rep. 270 ; Stobie v. … All the Justices concur, except BROWN, J., absent and not participating.

Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. Lane

69 Okla. 145 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 15, 1917

Our court, speaking.through Justice Williams in case of Olson v. … This brings us to the question as to what limitation is placed on the county or the county excise board in making an estimate and levy for county purposes including a levy for the support of separate schools.

Hinson v. Robins

159 Okla. 201 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 4, 1932

OLARK, V. O. J. … Also, in the case of McKannay v.

Farmers' State Bank of Olustee v. Gravelle

80 Okla. 276 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 1, 1921

In Fish v. … Citing Rogers v. Brown, 15 Okla. 524 , 86 Pac. 443 ; Pugh v. Stigler, 21 Okla. 854 , 97 Pac. 566 ; Oklahoma Moline Plow Co. v. Smith, 41 Okla. 498 , 139 Pac. 285 , and other authorities.

Gaffney v. Stanard

31 Okla. 541 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 12, 1912

Tootle, Wheeler & Motter Mercantile Co. v. Floyd, 28 Okla. 308 , 114 Pac. 259 ; Wagner v. Sattley Mfg. Co., 23 Okla. 52 , 99 Pac. 643 ; Board of Commissioners of D. County v. Wright, 8 Okla. 190 , 57 Pac. 203 . … Frame v. Ryel, 14 Okla. 536 [ 79 Pac. 97 ]; Board of Washita County v. Hubble, 8 Okla. 169 [ 56 Pac. 1085 ] ; B., K. & S. W. Ry. Co. v. Grimes, 38 Kan. 241 [ 16 Pac. 472 ]; Ryan v.

Von Stilli v. Young

203 Okla. 86 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 16, 1950

203 Okla. 86 (1950) 219 P.2d 224 VON STILLI et al. v. YOUNG et al. No. 33062. Supreme Court of Oklahoma. May 16, 1950. *87 Mark Ingle and F.A. Rittenhouse, both of Oklahoma City, for plaintiffs in error. W.F. … Smith and Paul Brown, both of Oklahoma City, for defendants in error. LUTTRELL, J.

Light of Truth Spiritualist Church v. Davis

198 Okla. 694 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 17, 1947

A similar situation was presented in Board of Trustees of the Full Gospel Temple v. Oklahoma City ex rel. Rauch, 196 Okla. 491 , 166 P. 2d 91 . … Board of Com’rs of Tulsa County. v. Sutton, 185 Okla. 665 , 95 P. 2d 648 ; Flint v. Board of Com’rs of Tulsa County, 188 Okla. 628 , 112 P. 2d 157 ; Hefner v. Cravens, 189 Okla. 558 , 118 P. 2d 652 ; Crewson et al. v.

Morse v. Earnest, Inc.

547 P.2d 955 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 16, 1976

Defendants seek certiorari complaining first that under the authority of School Board of Consol. Dist. No. 36 v. … School Board of Consol. Dist. No. 36 v. Edwards, supra, holds that an injunction bond is not required when a permanent injunction is granted but that case is not controlling here.

Couch v. Addy

35 Okla. 355 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 3, 1912

Brown.” It appears that neither the Thomas E. … People v. Watkins, 106 Mich. 437 , 64 N. W. 324 ; McMurtry v. Brown, 6 Neb. 368 .

Harris v. Boggess

124 Okla. 251 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 29, 1927

Watkins Medical Co. v. … In Newhouse v.

Hunt v. Rowton

143 Okla. 181 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 20, 1930

Shafir v. Sieben (Mo.) 233 S. W. 419 , 17 A. L. R. 637 ; 26 R. C. L. 703; Cain v. Quannah Light & Ice Co., 131 Okla. 25 , 267 Pac. 641 ; City of Tulsa v. Wells, 79 Okla. 39 , 191 Pac. 186 ; Selby v. … Lindstrom, 59 Okla. 227 , 158 Pac. 1127 ; Preston v. Lewis. 50 Okla. 754 , 151 Pac. 485 . The instruction was properly refused.

Marlow v. School Dist. No. 4, Murray County

29 Okla. 304 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 11, 1911

Kellogg v. School District No. 10, 13 Okla. 285 , 74 Pac. 110 ; Bowles v. Neely et al., 28 Okla. 556 , 115 Pac. 344 ; Hannan v. Board of Education of Lawton, 25 Okla. 372 , 107 Pac. 646 , 30 L. R. A. (N. … S.) 214; City of El Reno et al. v. Cleveland-Trinidad Pav. Co., 25 Okla. 648 , 107 Pac. 163 , 27 L. R. A. (N. S.) 650.

Warren v. Hunter

632 P.2d 418 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 28, 1981

The opinion of the Court of Appeals in Garrett v. Garrett 4 is not to be followed insofar as it is in conflict with our preceden-tial pronouncement in this case. Original jurisdiction assumed; writ denied. IRWIN, C. … Irby v. Martin, Okl., 500 P.2d 278, 280 [1972]; Galloway v. Galloway, Okl., 600 P.2d 321 [1979], 3 . Brown v. Goldsmith, Okl., 437 P.2d 247, 248 [1967]; Wilson v. Crutcher, 176 Okl. 481 , 56 P.2d 416, 417 [1936], 4 .

Professional Investors Life Insurance Co. v. Oklahoma Tax Commission

62 O.B.A.J. 3669 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 3, 1991

Co. v. Board of County Comm’rs. 10 In that case, we held that insurance companies who paid the annual premium tax were not exempt from county ad valorem tax. … Co. v. Board of County Comm’rs, 9 P.2d at 943 . . Id. . 1945 Okla.Sess. Laws tit. 36, ch. 1, § 1 (codified at Okla.Stat. tit. 36, § 104 (Supp.1957). . See 1986 Okla.Sess. Laws ch 251, § 8; 1987 Okla.Sess.

University Scholarship Corp. v. Parduhn

180 Okla. 446 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 29, 1937

Under the holdings of this court in Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County v. Phillips University, 144 Okla. 57 , 289 P. 720 ; Board of County Commissioners of Tulsa County v. … Board of County Commissioners of Cleveland County, 108 Okla. 78 , 234 P. 354 ; Phi Kappa Psi v. State, 175 Okla. 605 , 53 P. (2d) 1130 , and Sand Springs Home v.

Kiker v. City of Wewoka

205 Okla. 90 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 18, 1951

Goldsmith v. City of Ardmore, 136 Okla. 201 , 277 P. 230 ; Roper v. Board of Education of the City of Okmulgee, 167 Okla. 382 , 29 P. 2d 950 ; Skouby v. … Board of Education of School District No. 60, Logan County, 143 Okla. 272 , 288 P. 461 .