Case law

Bankoff v. Board of Adjustment

65 O.B.A.J. 1829 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 31, 1994

Most courts hold that while a landowner will not ordinarily be immune from a zoning change if he has done nothing more than obtain a permit from the licensing authority, he will be protected if he has made substantial expenditures … EVIDENTIARY ANALYSIS The question squarely presented is whether the trial court’s decision was clearly contrary to the weight of the evidence.

Kasenberg Et Ux. v. Hartshorn

30 Okla. 417 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 12, 1911

On cross-examination by defendants the following facts relative 'to said account were established: “Cross-examination by Judge Ralls: Q. … him in any way, was clearly error.

Board of County Commr's. of Day County v. State

19 Okla. 375 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 5, 1907

and acting county clerk, and were thereafter signed by the duly qualified and acting judge of the district court of said county, whose acts were duly attested by the duly qualified and acting deputy clerk of said district … This doctrine has been clearly annunciated and uniformly upheld by the decisions of the supreme court of the United States.”

Jackson v. Haney

166 Okla. 13 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 12, 1933

This is admitted by petitioner, and was known to the county court of Carter county, as clearly indicated by the findings and order of the latter court. … S. 1931, provides as follows : “Testamentary guardian to qualify and give bond.

Continental Casualty Company v. Beaty

455 P.2d 684 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 27, 1969

The enrollment application, after establishing grounds for eligibility asked: “8. … The evidence showed plaintiff, the only qualified anesthetist in Muskogee, was available and answered all calls for his services until becoming physically incapacitated.

Webb v. DAYTON TIRE & RUBBER CO. ETC.

697 P.2d 519 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 4, 1985

In short, no immunity from liability imposable in tort for punitive damages under the standards of 23 O.S.1981 § 9 may be implied from the language of the statute under consideration. … clear expression of contrary-legislative intent, the provisions of 23 O.S. 1981 § 9, which authorize imposition of punitive damages, “where the defendant has been guilty of oppression, fraud or malice, actual or presumed”, clearly

Wilson v. Oil Well Supply Co.

111 Okla. 63 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 30, 1925

The reply admitted the ownership to be that of a mortgagee, which is ownership qualified and special. The allegations of these pleadings required for their support an entirely different character of evidence. … Applying the test as set forth in these various authorities to the facts, as established by the pleadings in this case, we think the matters set up in the .reply clearly constitute a departure.

Booth v. McKnight

70 P.3d 855 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 13, 2003

upon *861 a critically deficient record. 29 Our examination of the Craig County record is of necessity confined to instruments from that county's probate proceeding which stand included in the record for appeal and which qualify … The terms of 12 0.$.1991 § 131 require that "[aletions for the following causes must be brought in the county in which the subject of the action is situated ... 4th, To quiet title, to establish a trust in, remove a cloud

Goodson v. United States

7 Okla. 117 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 30, 1898

It has been the settled practice of the courts and settled policy of the United States since the establishment of the territorial government. … Such haste in forcing to trial one charged with a felony as was manifested in this cause was clearly in violation of the substantial rights of the accused.

Minor v. Zidell Trust

618 P.2d 392 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 7, 1980

The curb and the wall behind it were clearly observable to the public. After driving into one of the marked spaces along the outer-perimeter, Motorist saw another stall he liked better. … The factors which militate in favor of the conclusion we reach here, and the process of reasoning in evaluating them, are clearly identified.

Pridemore v. Duncan

146 Okla. 70 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 18, 1930

Our statutes and decisions clearly establish and show that a husband and wife in this state may each acquire, accumulate, and possess separate property, and dispose of the same without claim or restrictions from the other … under consideration, section 11301, supra, said: “It seems quite clear that the purpose of the section under consideration is to provide a general rule of descent, and that the first sentence thereof * * * relates to and qualifies

OKLAHOMA CALL FOR REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE v. DRUMMOND

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

The statute defining qualified electors used "male." 44 ¶20 Obviously, women could not serve on juries because they could not qualify as electors. … Employing rational-basis review clearly causes the statutes to pass constitutional muster, as the State clearly has a legitimate interest in protecting the unborn.

DOE v. THE FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH U.S.A. OF TULSA

421 P.3d 284 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 19, 2017

We went further: "The First Amendment clearly safeguards the freedom to worship as well as the freedom not to worship ." Id. … I, qualifies under "unless otherwise provided by law." See Reeds , 2006 OK 43 at ¶ 11, 157 P.3d 100 ; U.S. Const. art.

Edwards v. Basel Pharmaceuticals

68 O.B.A.J. 794 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 4, 1997

The learned intermediary doctrine has been held applicable to prescription nicotine gum, because there was a sufficient relationship established between doctor and patient. Tracy v. … The first involves mass immunizations. Cunningham , at 1381; Allison v. Merck & Co., Inc., 110 Nev. 762 , 878 P.2d 948 (1994).

Fehring v. Universal Fidelity Life Insurance Co.

721 P.2d 796 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 1, 1986

The Court of Appeals found that the evidence before the trial court clearly established that the death of Bernard A. Fehring was the result of the actions of another person and thus within the exclusion. … Since the facts of the case clearly establish that the incident would have constituted the crime of assault by the party producing the pistol under Oklahoma statutes, 10 we must consider the language of that case regarding

Danciger Oil & Refining Co. v. Donahey

205 Okla. 390 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 6, 1951

The evidence also established that the trees might have been injured by three other causes. … Worley, supra, is clearly distinguishable under ‘the facts disclosed in the instant case.

Beveridge v. Harper & Turner Oil Trust

168 Okla. 609 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 31, 1934

The right of an individual to use his property as he pleases is a qualified as dis-tinguished from an absolute right. … and must uphold that judgment unless it is made to appear clearly unreasonable, arbitrary, or an unequal exercise of power.

Irion v. Nelson

207 Okla. 243 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 14, 1952

The burden is upon one claiming an easement clearly to establish such right. Catterall v. Pulis, 137 Okla. 86 , 278 P. 292 ; Board of County Commissioners of Jackson County v. Owen, 196 Okla. 538 , 166 P. 2d 766 . … This seems to be clearly established by the testimony of plaintiff’s witnesses.

National Ins. Underwriters v. Walker

206 Okla. 629 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 1, 1952

That the contract not being ambiguous, the court improperly permitted plaintiff to establish by oral testimony .what was meant by the term “taxiing”. … Plaintiff cites numerous cases to the effect that when an insurance contract is ambiguous and obtuse, that oral testimony is admissible to establish the actual intent of the parties.

Boggs v. United States

10 Okla. 424 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 4, 1900

Clearly the immediate tendency of the remarks was simply to induce a more careful and anxious consideration of the case, to let the jury understand that they should make an effort to agree upon a verdict, simply, but not … It seems to us that the entire conversation between the court and the jury is qualified, and its meaning and understanding modified by the remark: “If you will read the instructions of the court I think they are plain.”