Case law

Waldock v. First Nat. Bank of Idabel

43 Okla. 348 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 15, 1914

Matson v. Wharam, 2 T. R. 80; Jones v. Cooper, Cowp. 277; Anderson v. Hayman, 1 H. Bl. 120.” In the case of Davis v. Patrick, 141 U. S. 479 , 12 Sup. Ct. 58, 35 L. Ed. 826 , in an opinion by Mr. … In the case of Mackey v.

Marshall v. OK Rental & Leasing, Inc.

68 O.B.A.J. 1157 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 18, 1997

In Highlander v. K.F.G. … Our holding answers the question we declined to answer in Brown v.

Shell Oil Co. v. Tate

194 Okla. 23 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 21, 1944

See Garrett v. Haworth, 183 Okla. 569 , 83 P. 2d 822 ; Gripe v. Hatmaker, 189 Okla. 317 , 116 P. 2d 973 ; Bowles v. Brown, 187 Okla. 264 , 102 P. 2d 837 . … While, as pointed out in Davon Oil Co. v.

Miller v. City of Tulsa

353 P.2d 705 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 28, 1960

Curtis et al. v. … The board of commissioners was compelled to exercise its discretion as to who would be retained and in doing so could and did make a re-assignment as to duties among those retained.” *709 In Tremp v.

Scott v. Standridge

117 Okla. 111 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 9, 1926

Bank of Wellston v. Kreuzberg, 75 Okla. 97 , 181 Pac. 717 ; and Chadwell v. Brown, 88 Okla. 44 , 211 Pac. 410 . An examination of these cases fails to support plaintiff's contention. … Bank v. Stephenson, supra, and the two other Oklahoma cases heretofore cited that follow the First Nat. Bank v. Stephenson Case, supra.

Lowenstein v. Holmes

40 Okla. 33 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 20, 1913

State v. Thompson, 83 Mo. 257 ; State v. Butterfield et al., 75 Mo. 297 ; State v. … Grove v. Kansas City, supra; Brown et al. v. First National Bank of Temple, 35 Okla. 736, 130 Pac. 140 .

Harlow Publishing Co. v. Walden

168 Okla. 163 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 1, 1934

Therein the court quoted with approval from Farmers’ Bank of Roff v. … In Colonial Jewelry Co. v.

Meyer v. Lynde-Bowman-Darby Co.

35 Okla. 480 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 18, 1913

That section is as follows: “Every act enacted by the Legislature, and every ordinance and resolution passed by any county, city, town, or municipal board or local legislative body, levying a tax, shall specify distinctly … Commonwealth v. U. S. P. & G. Co., 121 Ky. 409 , 89 S. W. 251 ; C., O. & S. W. R. Co. v. Commonwealth, 33 Ky. L. Rep. 882, 111 S. W. 334 ; Southern Ry. Co. v. Hamblen County, 115 Tenn. 526 , 92 S. W. 238 .

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

911 P.2d 907 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 21, 1995

Oklahoma, Bar Association v. Brown, 863 P.2d 1108, 1111 (Okla.1993). … Oklahoma Bar Association v. Brown, supra.

LOCKETT v. EVANS

330 P.3d 488 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 23, 2014

Easterwood v. Choctaw County District Attorney, 2002 OK CIV APP 41 , 45 P.3d 436 . … See Conner v. North Carolina Council of State, 365 N.C. 242 , 716 S.E.2d 836, 841-842 (2011); Middleton v. Missouri Dept. of Corrections, 278 S.W.3d 193, 195-196 (Mo.2009); Abdur'Rahman v.

Kalka v. Mathews

186 Okla. 181 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 14, 1939

The controlling rule in an action of this nature was announced in Johnson v. Board of County Commissioners, 125 Okla. 96 , 256 P. 900 , and Oklahoma City v. Iams, 145 Okla. 272 , 292 P. 352 . … J., WELCH, V. C. J., and OSBORN, GIBSON, and DAVISON, JJ., concur.

Turner v. City of Ardmore

41 Okla. 660 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 18, 1913

Golden v. City of Guthrie, 3 Okla. 128 , 41 Pac. 350 ; Wallace v. Bullens, 6 Okla. 17 , 52 Pac. 957 ; Thompson v. Tucker, 15 Okla. 486 , 83 Pac. 413 ; Smith v. Board of Com'rs, 26 Okla. 819 , 110 Pac. 669 ; Fast v.

Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. Ward

68 Okla. 201 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 4, 1918

Co. v. Hughes, 64 Okla. 74 , 166 Pac. 411 ; M., O. & G. R. Co. v. Overmyre, 58 Okla. 723 , 160 Pac. 933 ; Seaboard A. L. R. Co. v. Horton, 233 U. S. 492 , 34 Sup. Ct. 635, 58 L. Ed. 1062 , L. R. A. 1915C, 1, Ann. … Co. v. Brown, 45 Okla. 143 , 144 Pac. 1075 , and denied by this court. In affirming this court in that ease, the Supreme Court, of the United States said: “The requirement of Const. U. S.

Elias v. City of Tulsa

408 P.2d 517 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 26, 1965

Key v. Donnell, 107 Okl. 157 , 231 P. 546 . In Roberts v. … Decisions to the same or similar effect are Wilkinson v. Hale, 184 Okl. 165 , 86 P. 2d 305 ; Barrett v. Board of Comr’s of Tulsa County, 185 Okl. 111 , 90 P.2d 442 ; Williams v.

In Re Estate of Lacy

431 P.2d 366 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 23, 1967

Slater v. Phipps, 193 Okl. 267 , 143 P.2d 133 . … Brown v. Brown, Okl., 287 P.2d 913 . But proof of testamentary capacity of a testator is not necessarily confined to the exact time of the execution of the will.

Mohrman v. Paxton

172 Okla. 389 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 19, 1935

In the case of Glaze v. … Brown, 87 Okla. 46 , 208 P. 785 ; Bales v. Breedlove, 96 Okla. 280 , 222 P. 542 ; Sinclair Oil & Gas Co. v. Allen, 143 Okla. 290 , 288 P. 981 . The above rule is controlling of the issues presented in this case.

Randolph v. Oklahoma City General Hospital

180 Okla. 513 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 18, 1937

The defendant furnished supplies, nurses, operating room, and board. … Also, in the Case of Emerson v.

Exendine v. Goldstine

14 Okla. 100 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 4, 1904

(School District v. Trotter, 10 Okla. 625 ; Board of Commissioners v. Hovel, 8 Okla. 169 ; Devine v. Silvers, 8 Okla. 700 .)

State Ex Rel. Department of Public Welfare v. Martin

570 P.2d 623 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 11, 1977

At the time of the alleged commission of the malpractice, said hospital was operated under the Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma. … LAVENDER, V. C. J., and DAVISON, IRWIN, BERRY and BARNES, JJ., concur. HODGES, C.

In Re Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co.

143 Okla. 217 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 6, 1930

This is an appeal from the judgment of the Court of Tax Review denying the protest of the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Company against the rate of levy fixed by tbe excise board of Cotton county for the drag fund … J., LESTER, V. O. J., and RILEY, J., absent. Note — See “Taxation,” 37 Cyc. p. 1097, n. 92; p. 1118, n. 8.