Case law

Sipes v. Ardmore Book & News Co.

138 Okla. 180 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 29, 1929

Brown and D. T. Stil'es, as sureties, guaranteeing the faithful per*' formance of the contract. Suit is brought on this contract and bond. … In the case of Love v. Cahn (Ark.) 124 S. W. 259 , it is said: “A bond should not be held to cover a liability occurring before its execution unless its terms make provision to that effect.”

Hale v. Record

44 Okla. 803 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 9, 1915

See Arthur v. Board of Com'rs of Choctaw County et al., 43 Okla. 174 , 141 Pac. 1 . … Schafer v. Midland Hotel Co., 41 Okla. 111 , 137 Pac. 664 . This finding is reasonably supported by the evidence, and is therefore binding upon this court. Bretch Bros. v.

McIllwain v. Bills

206 Okla. 238 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 1, 1952

HALLEY, V. C. J. … He cites in support of this proposition Taliaferro v. Reirdon, 191 Okla. 43 , 126 P. 2d 696 ; McCleary v. Brown, 190 Okla. 19 , 119 P. 2d 830 ; Neustadt, Ex’r, v. Daube, 190 Okla. 694 , 126 P. 2d 999 ; and 54 O.

Yeager v. Jackson

162 Okla. 207 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 7, 1933

Parker, 35 Okla. 74 , 128 P. 101 ; Horton v. Birdson, 35 Okla. 275 , 129 P. 701 ; Colonial Jewelry Co. v. Brown, 38 Okla. 44 , 131 P. 1077 ; Rutherford v. Holbert, 42 Okla. 735 , 142 P. 1099 ; Adams v. … Thurmond, 48 Okla. 189 , 149 P. 1141 ; Williamson v. Scully, 52 Okla. 531 , 152 P. 839 ; Hoard, Jr., Co. v. Grand Rapids Showcase Co., 74 Okla. 111 , 173 P. 844 ; Commercial National Bank v.

Eli v. Carter Oil Co.

126 Okla. 12 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 19, 1927

Oil Co. v. … Marsh (Ky.) 229; Drake’s Administrator v. Vaughn, 6; J. J. Marsh (Ky.) 147; Buckinghouse v. Gregg, 19 Ind. 401 ; Milk v. Kent, 60 Ind, 231; Page v. Bartlett, 101 Ala. 193 ; Jones v. Rountree, 96 Ga. 230 ; McBain v.

Town of Skiatook v. Brummett

387 P.2d 115 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 12, 1963

V. … In support of this contention the case of City of McAlester v. State ex rel. Board of Public Affairs, 195 Okl. 1 , 154 P.2d 579 , and similar cases are relied upon.

Wolozyn v. Begarek

378 P.2d 1007 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 19, 1963

In Sawers v. … See also Morris v. Broadview, Inc., 385 Ill. 228 , 52 N.E.2d 769 , and Bart v.

State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Busch

976 P.2d 38 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 18, 1999

See Shelton v. Lambert, 1965 OK 28, ¶ 11 , 399 P.2d 467, 470 ; Globe-Union, Inc. v. Chicago Telephone Supply Co., 103 F.2d 722, 728 (7th Cir.1939). 35 . See Brown v. … Brown, 1989 OK 75 , 773 P.2d 751 ). 90 . State ex rel. Okl. Bar Ass’n v. Patmon, 1997 OK 62, ¶ 5 , 939 P.2d 1155, 1157 . 91 . For the terms of ORPC Rule 8.4(c), see supra note 61. 92 .

Oklahoma Employment Security Commission v. Sanders

272 P.2d 379 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 18, 1954

Special Indemnity Fund v. England, 204 Okl. 207 , 228 P.2d 629 ; National Zink Co. v. Goines, 193 Okl. 460 , 145 P.2d 183 ; American Iron & Machine Works v. Weatherman, 187 Okl. 260 , 102 P.2d 604 . … We agree that the statute, in providing that ‘the findings of the Board as to the facts, if supported by evidence, shall be conclusive’, * * * means supported by substantial evidence. Washington, V. & M. Coach Co. v.

Bounds v. Gooch

92 Okla. 260 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 19, 1923

Gibson v. Rappole, 86 Okla. 100 , 206 Pac. 825 ; Bouten v. Carson, 51 Okla. 579 , 152 Pac. 131 ; Carpenter v. Roach, 55 Okla. 103 , 155 Pac. 237 ; Primous v. Wertz. 65 Okla. 7 , 162 Pac. 481 ; Buel, Pryor & Daniel v. … Co. 65 Okla. 108 , 163 Pac. 536 ; Brown v. Tull, 65 Okla. 119 , 164 Pac. 785 ; J. R. Watkins Medical Co. v. Coombs, 66 Okla. 126 , 166 Pac. 1072 ; Brisley v. Mahaffey, 64 Okla. 319 , 167 Pac. 984 ; Shawnee Natl. Bank v.

Son v. Linebaugh

101 Okla. 291 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 15, 1924

Warner et al. v. … Mayo v. Pitchford, 43 Okla. 105 , 141 Pac. 433 ; Yazoo & M. V. R. Co. v. Kirk, 102 Miss. 41 , 58 South. 710 , 834, 43 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1172, Ann. Cas. 1914C, 968.” To like .effect are Dennison v. Christopher, 18 Okla.

Nance v. Hester

351 P.2d 746 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 15, 1960

of process, mileage and per diem of witnesses and members of the election board. … See Allison v. Howell, 204 Okl. 404 , 230 P.2d 706 ; Taylor v. Dale, 201 Okl. 519 , 207 P.2d 789 , and Salaney v. Ferris, 201 Okl. 236 , 204 P.2d 270 .

Troxell v. Oklahoma Department of Human Services

318 P.3d 206 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 26, 2013

They have relied on the Court of Civil Appeals opinion in Laws v. State ex rel. Oklahoma Department of Human Services, 2008 OK CIV APP 97, ¶ 16 , 81 P.3d 78, 84 . … In addition, if a State's foster care payment standard includes across-the-board higher foster care rates for working foster parents to pay for child care, or includes provisions for periodic across-the-board increases for

Mid-Continent Life Ins. Co. v. Skye

113 Okla. 184 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 20, 1925

Also in the case of Friend v. … As said in the case of Brown v. Connecticut Fire Ins.

Holliday v. Holliday

327 P.2d 456 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 24, 1958

One of the more recent cases in which this court applied the above rules was Brown v. Brown, Okl., 287 P.2d 913 , which, in some of its factual aspects, is similar to the present one. … Gidney v. Chappell, supra [ 26 Okl. 737 , 110 P. 1100 ]; McQueen v. Wilson, 131 Ala. 606 , 31 So. 94 .”

Holliman v. Cole

168 Okla. 473 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 26, 1934

State v. Addington, 143 N. C. 683 , 57 S. E. 398 , 11 Ann. Cas. 314 (citing Black’s Dict., p. 494; State v. Burton, 18 S. E. 657 , 113 N. C. 655 ; People v. Nedrow, 13 N. E. 533 , 122 Ill. 363 ; Hanscombe v. … Board of Com’rs of Custer County v. City of Clinton, 49 Okla. 795 , 154 P. 513 . To the same general effect are the following cases: Western Union Tele. Co. v. State, 146 Ind. 54 , 44 N. E. 793 ; State v.

Hicks v. Gay

31 Okla. 150 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 9, 1912

Hicks and Ben Hennessey, secretary of the board of agriculture and ex officio state engineer, plaintiff’s in error, in the district court of that county. … Davis v. Lammers et al., 23 Okla. 338 , 100 Pac. 514 . As no other 'error is assigned, this proceeding in error is dismissed. HAYES, KANE, and WILLIAMS, JJ-, concur; DUNN, J., absent, and not participating.

Wood v. Colby

30 Okla. 106 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 10, 1911

Smith v. Howard, 33 Ark. 303 . … Kennedy v. Brown, 21 Kan. 172; Dore v. Corey, 13 Cal. 502 ; Gille v. Emmons, 61 Kan. 217 , 59 Pac. 338 ; Braithwaite v. Jordan, 5 N. D. 196 , 65 N. W. 701 , 31 L. R. A. 238; Gardner v.

Baughman v. Weicker

136 Okla. 33 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 26, 1929

Crawford v. Wilson, 4 Barb. 504 . … People v. Ballhorn, 100 Ill. App. 571 .

Stovall v. Breedlove

79 Okla. 24 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 29, 1920

“Priscilla Breedlove v. James N. Stovall. No. 778. “Frank T. Lamar v. Priscilla Breedlove et al. No. 954. “Frank T. Lamar v. Priscilla Breedlove et al. No. 1112. “Frank T. Lamar v. Priscilla Breedlove et al. No. 1113. … In support of the rule the following cases are cited: Taylor v. Brewer, 78 N. C. 8 ; Batts v. Martin, 44 Tex. 91 ; People v. Holden, 28 Cal. 123 ; Hughes v. Jackson, 12 Md. 450 ; Bank v.