Case law

Henslee v. Herring

403 P.2d 511 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 9, 1965

On this conclusion we are left with the question as to what was the actual vested legal or equitable interest claimed by Dora Mae as alleged in the amended petition. *514 Plaintiffs’ brief cites Brown v. … See also Brown v. Wilson, supra.

St. Louis-S. F. Ry. Co. v. Comanche County

136 Okla. 265 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 21, 1929

To sustain its contention, the railway company cites Cheek v. Eye, 96 Okla. 44 , 219 Pac. 883 ; Mitsler v. Eye, 107 Okla. 289 , 231 Pac. 1045 ; Consolidated School District No. 97 v. … In the case of Wade et al. v. City of Richmond, and Thomas v. Same, 18 Grat.

Ynclan v. Woodward

237 P.3d 145 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 25, 2010

Franks, see note 8, supra; Kitchens v. Kitchens, see note 8, supra; Brown v. Brown, see note 8, supra; Knott v. Knott, 418 N.W.2d 505, 509 (Minn.App.1988); Wright v. Wright, 279 Mich. … In re Whitaker, 36 Ohio St.3d 213 , 522 N.E.2d 563, 568-69 (1988); Brown v. Burch, 30 Va.

Little v. Lovett

193 Okla. 157 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 5, 1943

See Brown v. Bassett, 191 Okla. 22 , 126 P. 2d 705 , and cases therein cited. … In Belford v.

Nichols v. Oklahoma City

195 Okla. 305 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 20, 1945

.- This is a proceeding on appeal from the board of the commissioners in condemnation proceeding. The award was for $16,730. The condemnee, G. A. … Co. v. Fowler, 113 Mo. 458 , 20 S.W. 1069 ; Ringle v. Board of Chosen Freeholders, 59 N.J.L. 661 , 29 Atl. 483 ; Grand River Dam Authority v. Jarvis, 124 Fed. 2d 914. See, also, language by this court in Short v.

State Ex Rel. Read, Ins. v. Midwest Mutual Burial Ass'n

176 Okla. 468 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 3, 1936

In the case of Board of Commissioners of Logan County v. … State v. Butler, 70 Fla 102, 69 So. 771 : Mugge v. Warnell, etc., Co., 58 Fla. 318 , 50 So. 645 ; Brown v Lakeland, 61 Fla. 508 , 54 So. 716 ; State v. Greer, 88 Fla. 249 , 102 So. 739 ; 37 A. L. R. 1298; Getzen v.

Berryman v. Howell

194 Okla. 259 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 6, 1944

McCoy v. Hall, 191 Okla. 311 , 131 P. 2d 60 . a. The statute, 70 O. … In School District No. 37 v. Latimer, 190 Okla. 620 , 126 P. 2d 280 , we sustained the statute as against an attack on certain constitutional grounds. Judgment affirmed. CORN, C. J., GIBSON, V. C.

In re Gypsy Oil Co.

142 Okla. 291 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 10, 1929

In Pitts v. First Nat. Bank of Muskogee, 138 Okla. 284 , 281 Pac. 133 , this court said: “Every municipality must submit its budget to the excise board of their respective counties. City of Sapulpa v. … Schulte v. Board of County Commissioners, 119 Okla. 261 , 250 Pac. 123 . The question then arises as to the effect of the funding judgments.

Johnston v. Shaffer

74 Okla. 25 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 10, 1918

v. … Fox v. Tyler, 109 Fed. 258 , 48 C. C.

City of Guymon v. Finicum

265 P.2d 706 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 15, 1953

See City of Sapulpa v. Young, 147 Okl. 179 , 296 P. 418 . There inheres in the verdict of the jury-a finding of notice, actual or constructive, to the city and that likewise is reasonably supported by the testimony. … J., JOHNSON, V, €. J., and WELCH, J., dissent.

Southland Refining Co. v. State Industrial Com.

167 Okla. 3 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 12, 1933

Crown Drug Co. v. Hofstrom, 158 Okla. 27 , 12 P. (2d) 519 ; Drumright Feed Company v. Hunt, 90 Okla. 277 , 217 P. 491 . … In this connection we cite Mobley v.

Capps v. Vasey Bros.

23 Okla. 554 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 12, 1910

In the case of Harlan et al. v. Brown, 4 Ind. App. 319 , 30 N. … In the case of Pierson v. Townsend et al., 2 Hill (N.

Hancock v. Little

199 Okla. 256 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 14, 1947

Under such circumstances, as stated by this court in Durham v. … Brown, 164 Okla. 139 , 24 P. 2d 295 , it is not the duty of this court to search the record to find some theory upon which to sustain the action of the trial court, but the cause may be reversed and remanded, with directions

In Re the Oklahoma Capitol Improvement Authority

74 O.B.A.J. 1722 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 3, 2003

Juvenile Affairs $ 1,227,601.00 s. the Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services $ 2,075,000.00 t. the Oklahoma Military Department $ 5,700,101.00 u. the Department of Public Safety $ 1,194,000.00 v. … M.Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, each and every agency, board, commission, department or other entity of state government as identified in paragraph 16 of subsection A of this section shall have

In Re Bond

168 Okla. 161 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 10, 1934

The Board of Governors has recommended that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for a period of 90 days. There can be no excuse for conduct of this character. … People v. Culkin, 248 N. Y. 465 , 162 N. E. 487 . See, also, State ex rel. Seton v. McMenamin (Ore.) 29 P. (2d) 521 . He should be known “* * * for his science and for his high renoun.”

L'GGRKE v. Sherman

223 P.3d 383 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 3, 2009

In Joiner v. … Tidemark Exploration, Inc. v. Good, 1998 OK 67, ¶¶ 5-6 , 967 P.2d 1194 ; Joiner v. Brown, 1996 OK 112, ¶¶ 9-10 , 925 P.2d 888 ; Bushert v. Hughes, 1996 OK 21, ¶ 20 , 912 P.2d 334 ; Grant Square Bank & Trust Co. v.

HEATH v. GUARDIAN INTERLOCK NETWORK, INC.

2016 OK 18 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 23, 2016

Subsequently, Heath obtained a restricted license which permitted him to drive only vehicles equipped with a Board of Tests for Alcohol and Drug Influence (Board of Tests) approved ignition interlock device. ¶4 On December … Nevertheless, Guardian also contends that: 1) the Board of Tests, and the Tax Commission also interpret §6-212.3 as applying only to maintenance fees; and 2) public policy requires that statute to be read as applying only

Stansell v. Tucker

191 Okla. 377 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 27, 1942

Brown Stansell and the Commercial Standard Insurance Company, his insurance carrier, to review an award made to respondent D. J. Tucker under date of January 28, 1942. … In Hissom Drilling Co. v.

Lindauer v. Oklahoma City Urban Renewal Authority

496 P.2d 1174 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 14, 1972

See McDonald v. Board of Election Comm’rs, 394 U.S. 802, 809 , 89 S. Ct. 1404 , 22 L.Ed.2d 739 (1969); Berman v. Parker, 348 U.S. 26, 33 , 75 S.Ct. 98 , 99 L.Ed. 27 (1954). … Missouri, 120 U.S. 68, 71-72 , 7 S.Ct. 350 , 30 L.Ed. 578 (1887); McDonald v. Board of Election Comm’ rs, supra.

Edmondston v. Porter

65 Okla. 18 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 2, 1917

A meeting of the school board at Blackwell was had on that night, Mr. Tetrick and Edmondston appearing there with the letters, and Mrs. Porter appearing there at the request of the school board. … And again in Elliott v.