Case law

Tulsa Interstate Petroleum Co. v. Allison

112 Okla. 47 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 14, 1925

This court, in the recent case of Derdyn et ux. v. … .” -- This court, in the case of Sango v.

Adams Oil & Gas Co. v. Hudson

55 Okla. 386 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 6, 1915

Kruse, supra; Devlin on Deeds, supra; Boone et al. v. Chiles et al., supra; Perkins v. Gregory et al., 87 Kan. 303 , 124 Pac. 168 ; Coon v. Browning, 10 Kan. 85 ; King v. … App. 258 , 133 Pac. 1153 ; Carr v. Mouzon, 93 S. C. 161, 76 S. E. 201 , Ann. Cas. 1914C, 731; Lakin v. Sierra-Butte Gold Mining Co., 25 Fed. 337 ; Tinnin v. Brown, 98 Miss. 378 , 53 South. 780 , Ann.

In Re McCurtain's Estate

377 P.2d 210 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 18, 1962

In Brown v. … In Brummett v.

State v. Eighteen Casks of Beer

24 Okla. 786 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 4, 1909

Such, indeed, was the point decided in the case of Brown v. Maryland, 35 U. S. (13 Wheat.) 419 , 6 L. … Scott v. Donald, supra; Rhodes v. Iowa, siipra.

Sapulpa Co. v. State Ex Rel. Lankford

64 Okla. 68 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 12, 1917

In Jack v. … Bank v. State Nat. Bank, 10 Wall. 604 , 19 L. Ed. 1008 ; Martin v. Webb et al., 110 U. S. 7 , 3 Sup. Ct. 428, 28 L. Ed. 49 ; G. V. B. Min. Co. v. First Nat. Bank, 95 Fed. 23 , 36 C. C.

Galer v. Berrian

43 Okla. 303 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 13, 1914

See Barnes et al. v. Lynch et al., 9 Okla. 156 , 59 Pac. 995 ; Richardson R. B. Dry Goods Co. v. Hockaday et al., 12 Okla. 546 , 73 Pac. 957 ; Apache State Bank v. Daniels, 32 Okla. 121 , 121 Pac. 237 , 40 L. R. A. (N. … S.) 901; Wat-tahnoh-zhe et al. v. Moore, 36 Okla. 631 , 129 Pac. 877 ; Watson v. Borah et al., 37 Okla. 357 , 132 Pac. 347 ; Caldwell v. Brown, 56 Kan. 566 , 44 Pac. 10 . We have read all of the testimony.

Tulsa MacHinery Co. v. Oklahoma Tax Commission

208 Okla. 138 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 24, 1953

In Tri-State Asphalt Corporation v. … In that case the court in reversing the order of the Board to Tax Appeals said: “The basis of the decision of the Board of Tax Appeals was the fact that in order to produce appellee’s product it was essential to transport

State Ex Rel. Research Institute v. Nix

195 Okla. 176 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 5, 1944

State ex rel. v. Boyett, 183 Okla. 49 , 80 P. 2d 201 . … State v. King, 154 Ind. 621 , 57 N. E. 535 ; State v. Williams, 110 Tenn. 549 , 75 S. W. 948 , and Clement v. Graham, 78 Vt. 290 , 63 Atl. 146 .

Grabow v. McCracken Et Ux.

23 Okla. 612 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 12, 1909

Ed. 804 ; McCrea v. Purmort, 16 Wend. (N. Y.) 460, 30 Am. Dec. 103 ; Hersey v. Terrill, 39 Me. 271 ; Quimby v. Stebbins, 55 N. H. 420; Steed v. Hinson, 76 Ala. 298 ; Freley v. Bentley, 1 Dak. 25 , 46 N. … Veach, 32 Kan. 167 , 4 Pac. 100 ; McElvain v. Harris, 20 Mo. 457 ; Fisk v. Soul, 87 Cal. 313 ; Brown v. Thurston, 26 Me. 126 .

In Re Rice

167 Okla. 330 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 13, 1934

The Board of Governors of the State Bar of Oklahoma have recommended to this court that C. T. … Respondent has lodged a transcript of the proceedings in this court to review the findings and recommendations of the Board of Governors. The Board of Governors found against respondent on each of the charges.

Dow Jones & Co. v. State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Tax Commission

787 P.2d 843 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 30, 1990

Kresge Co. v. Bowers, 170 Ohio St. 405 , 166 N.E.2d 139 , 141 [1960]; State ex rel. Park Invest. Co. v. Board of Tax Appeals, 32 Ohio St.2d 28 , 289 N.E.2d 579, 581 [1972]; Valent v. … New Jersey State Board of Education, 114 N.J.Super. 63 , 274 A.2d 832, 836 [1971]; Clark v. Board of Education of Little Rock Sch. Dist., 374 F.2d 569, 570-571 [8th Cir.1967], 10 .

Clark v. Lockstone

170 Okla. 316 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 30, 1934

Dean v. City of New Cordell, 151 Okla. 149 , 3 P. (2d) 160 . … Fest v. Gilbert, 102 Okla. 245 , 229 P. 275 , and Samuels v. Granite Sav. Bank & Trust Co. et al., 150 Okla. 174 , 1 P. (2d) 145 .

Saxon v. MacY

61 O.B.A.J. 1853 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 10, 1990

In Westinghouse Electric Corp. v. … In Rogers v. Excise Board of Greer County, supra, we held that even a violation of the Oklahoma Open Meeting Act was not sufficient to apply the public-interest exception to the mootness doctrine.

State Ex Rel. Thomas v. Brenner

171 Okla. 320 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 2, 1935

This is an appeal from a judgment of the district court of Kay county in an action in which it was sought to obtain a writ of mandamus requiring defendants in error, wlm constituted tbe board of commissioners of tbe city … Stearns, Mayor, v. Sims, 24 Okla. 623 , 104 P. 44 , 24 L. R. A. (N. S.) 475; City of Guthrie v. Stewart, Co. Treas., 45 Okla. 603 , 146 P. 585 ; Champlin v. Carter, 78 Okla. 300 , 190 P. 679 .

Powers v. Rude

14 Okla. 381 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 3, 1904

Co. v. Thompson, 24 Ivan. 170; Cincinnati S. & C. R. Co. v. Bensley, 51 Fed. 738 ; Phillips v. Seymour, 91 U. S. 650 ; Jones v. U. S., 96 U. S. 24 .) The case of Railway Company v. … Co. v.

Cline v. Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice

313 P.3d 253 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 29, 2013

In Bonner v. … Comm'n v.

State Ex Rel. Swirczynski v. Key

121 Okla. 64 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 22, 1926

L. 804, Wells v. Mo. Pac. (Mo.) 19 S. W. 530 , 40 L. R. A. (N. S.) 27, and Manor Casino v. State (Tex. Civ. App.) 34 S. W. 769 , are not applicable nor controlling in any issue in volved in this care. … All the Justices concur, except BRAN-SON, V. C. J., dissenting.

Purcell v. Corder

33 Okla. 68 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 14, 1912

Co. v. Mountain Park Stock Farm Co., supra; Wey et al. v. City Bank of Hobart et al., 29 Okla. 313 , 116 Pac. 943 . In Logan v. Brown, 20 Okla. 334 , 95 Pac. 441 , 20 L. R. A. (N. … Browne, Stat. Fr., sec. 463, cas. cit. The same remarks will apply with equal force here.” See to the same effect, in support of the right of specific performance as to wills, Mundorff et ux. v.

Statser v. Chickasaw Lumber Company

327 P.2d 686 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 8, 1958

In Pace v. … Pirtle v. Brown, supra; Sisemore v. Voelkle, Okl., 312 P.2d 922, 925 .

Perry v. Carter

173 Okla. 267 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 16, 1935

J. 57; Waterbury v. Board of Commissioners, 10 Mont. 515 , 26 P. 1002 . Garnishment proceedings are remedial in character and are purely legislative. … That it shall be lawful for 'any creditor of any person, firm or corporation in this state, to whom the state or any county, city, town, school board, board of education or any municipal subdivision of the state is indebted