Case law

Trustees of Church of God v. Nussbaum

199 Okla. 175 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 23, 1947

Citation of authority is unnecessary to support the rule that in cases of equitable cognizance this court will weigh the evidence, but will not reverse the judgment unless clearly against the weight thereof. … Defendants’ argument in support of the trial court’s findings upon the second fact question is contrary to the record evidence, which conclusively establishes that the Church of God mentioned by the testator was established

Sautbine v. Keller

423 P.2d 447 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 25, 1966

Marshall, 200 Okl. 573 , 197 P.2d 990 , syllabus 3 follows this principle: “Where the rights of parties are clearly defined and established by law, equity has no power to change or unsettle those rights, but in all such instances … Tulsa Yellow Cab, etc., Co., 178 Okl. 15 , 61 P.2d 645 , are clearly distinguishable from the present case and not controlling.

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.”

Carter Oil Co. v. Oklahoma Tax Commission

166 Okla. 1 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 17, 1933

This congressional act clearly provides that after April 26, 1981, oil and gas produced under-lease of the character held by plaintiff in this case shall be subject to all state tax, thus clearly giving congressional sanction … Not every governmental *4 instrumentality is immune from taxation as is evidenced by tbe reasoning in Shaw v. Gibson-Zabniser Oil Corp., 276 U. S. 576 , 72 L.

Wentz v. Ingenthron

146 Okla. 165 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 25, 1930

of Washington had a very similar proposition under consideration; in that case the county commissioners’ resolution and notice of election being for issuance of $2,500,000 bonds for constructing' new roads and improving established … They are public officials of the state and the law presumes that they will do so, until a contrary intention is clearly made to appear.

Hendrick v. Walters

65 O.B.A.J. 33 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 16, 1993

sua sponte. 13 When a member of the law-making assembly initiates legal proceedings in a representational capacity as a senator or a member of the House of Representatives, that legislator can claim no elevated status in establishing … of justiciability hence clearly met. 29 III.

City of Chickasha v. O'Brien

58 Okla. 46 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 12, 1915

Here no such right is conferred by statute, but is expressly legislated against, and the authority of the Legis - lature so to do is clearly established by the authorities cited. … This would be the effect not only in the present case, but also as to every bond of this character outstanding, by taking away from said bonds the immunity from attack given thereto by said section 644.

Warner v. Wickizer

61 Okla. 200 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 31, 1916

He, therefore, was not tbe owner of tbe entire legal estate, as distinguished from the equitable estate, in this land, and therefore cannot claim immunity from champerty under bis first contention. … It is clearly not the intent of the law to prohibit obedience to its own mandates.

In Re Tefertiller

772 P.2d 396 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 18, 1989

Otherwise, the parties do not dispute that Shawver would qualify as a beneficiary under §§ 152 and 153. … Liberal construction is accorded to the enforcement stage after it is clearly established that the right has attached, but not so in the process of determining the question of whether a lien does exist in contemplation of

Crow v. Hardridge

73 Okla. 136 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 30, 1918

Grayson, the duly appointed. qualified, and acting guardian of said Edmond Hardridge, who was yet a minor. … The rule is so well established as to need no citation of authority that a demurrer to an answer on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a defense searches the record and will reach back to the

In Re State Question No. 137, Etc.

114 Okla. 132 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 9, 1926

And the first objection to the petition urged in the brief of protestante is that it— “Clearly shows that this petition was not only fostered and circulated by the Farmers Union, but was paid for out of the funds of the organization … force and effect, or to be repealed by the enactment of Senate Bill No. 54, and wo conceive it to be our duty to assist the people in expressing such desire at the polls *135 when this can properly be clone in conformity to established

Ex Parte Gordon

63 Okla. 305 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 21, 1916

The well-established law of statutory construction lays down the rule that an exception or proviso is exclusive. … Therefore this exemption as provided is exclusive of all other exemptions, and in attempting to provide therefor the board of commissioners have clearly exceeded their authority.”

Harrold v. Territory of Oklahoma

18 Okla. 395 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 15, 1907

Had another witness been placed upon the stand by the defense, and sworn that he was with the prisoner at Clancy’s and Nennedy’s that night, it would clearly have been competent to ask what the prisoner wore, and whether … the same was induced by fear, under dixress, or through promise of leniency or immunity.

Petuskey v. Cannon

742 P.2d 1117 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 21, 1987

Even though that Court determined the Constitution and statutes make it clear the district court clerk is a judicial officer, subject to the administrative power of the Supreme Court, the Court qualified the power and control … These statutes clearly establish Petitioner’s allegation that Respondent improperly interfered with Petitioner’s collection efforts is unfounded.

Mann v. Osborne

128 Okla. 32 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 15, 1927

was contended that by the Schedule of the Constitution, the mayor of the city of Richmond, who held his office by appointment of the Military Governor, was entitled to hold his office until his successor was elected and qualified … Legislature had the power to pass this statute, and said: “The preamble and first section of that schedule show the only purpose for which it was adopted, and that it was not intended to secure to incumbents then in office, any immunity

Champlin Refining Co. v. Le Force

176 Okla. 48 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 14, 1936

The plaintiff’s own testimony established these circumstances at the time the complaint was filed before the county judge. … Plaintiff contends, in effect, that, even though these circumstances existed, he has sufficiently established a want of probable cause.

Champlin Refining Co. v. Donnell

173 Okla. 527 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 17, 1935

The difficulty is that counsel never did qualify the witness as to his know'edge of the value of lands in that vicinity, at or near the time of the taking, but assuming that he was qualified, the form of the question propounded … It has been, said that: “An appellate court should hesitate before setting aside the verdict of a jury in a condemnation case, and it will only make such order when it clearly appears that the verdict is unjust and unsupported

Pacific Mut. Life Ins. Co. of California v. Coley

62 Okla. 161 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 9, 1917

In fact reports establish contrariwise that there was an external mark on your body that immediately disabled you as a result of accidental bodily injury. … misrepresentations sufficient to afford him relief, it is not difficult to produce, nor is it a harsh rule to require, the evidence to point out the fraud, or false statement of fact,' or other reasons relied on, so that it can be clearly

Shawver & Son, Inc. v. Tefertiller

772 P.2d 396 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 18, 1989

Otherwise, the parties do not dispute that Shawver would qualify as a beneficiary under §§ 152 and 153. … Liberal construction is accorded to the enforcement stage after it is clearly established that the right has attached, but not so in the process of determining the question of whether a lien does exist in contemplation of

Lambrecht v. Bartlett

656 P.2d 269 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 21, 1982

This payment provides another undisputed reason that the sales in question did not qualify for exemption from registration. … The statute clearly specifies what damages can be recovered — the consideration paid with ten percent (10%) interest from the date of payment plus costs and attorney fees, less the amount of any income received.