Case law

In Re Ballot Title for Initiative Petition No. 43, State Question No. 28

35 Okla. 188 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 3, 1912

, and in lieu thereof providing for state, county, and precinct election boards. … (Edwards et al., Board of Trustees, v. Welch, 29 Okla. 335 , 116 Pac. 791; Cleveland-Trinidad Paving Co. v. Woods, 29 Okla. 684, 119 Pac. 123 ; Bryan v. Sullivan, 29 Okla. 686 , 119 Pac. 124 .)

Rose v. First Nat. Bank of Stigler

93 Okla. 120 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 24, 1923

Holmes v. Halstid, 76 Okla. 31 , 183 Pac 969 . The case of First National Bank of Mounds v. … Our own court, in Logan v.

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

74 Okla. 203 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 28, 1919

In the petition it is alleged that the excise board in and for Seminole county did review the estimate submitted to it by the board of county commissioners of said county for current expenses for said county for the fiscal … It is apparent 'that the opinion of this court in No. 7320, Dusk et al. v. White.

O. F. Haley Co. v. State

34 Okla. 300 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 18, 1912

Brown 6 eases 8-19-09. Wm. Moore. “ “ 2 8-19-09. “ • “ 2 “ “ 8-19-09. “ 2 casks beer. 8-19-09. “ 2 “ “ 8-20-09. “ 2 " “ 8-20-09. “ 8-23-09. Ed Potts. 2 “ “ 8-31-09. A. J. Porter. … Dec. 717 ; Graves v. Johnson, 156 Mass. 211 , 30 N. E. 818 , 15 L. R. A. 834, 32 Am. St. Rep. 446 ; Banchor v. Hansel, 47 Me. 58 ; Hanauer v. Doane, 12 Wall. 342 , 20 L. Ed. 439 ; Fisher v. Lord, 63 N.

Texas-Empire Pipe Line Co. v. Tulsa County Excise Bd.

192 Okla. 467 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 11, 1943

In Lowden et al. v. Caddo County Excise Board, 176 Okla. 213 , 55 P. 2d 472 , and Greer County Excise Board v. … Co. v.

In Re Dayton's Estate

173 Okla. 180 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 11, 1935

See Meeks v. Hahn, 20 Cal. 620 , and Meeks v. Kirby, 47 Cal. 168 . … As was said in Proctor v.

Ruemmeli v. Cravens

13 Okla. 342 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 10, 1903

(Floyd v. Patterson, 13 Am. St. Rep. 787 ; Gilliam v. Brown, 43 Miss. 641 ; Simpson v. Blass, 2 Taunt 246; Roby v. West, 4 N. H. 290.) This rule as stated by the supreme court of the United States in Planters' Bank v. … (Wooten v. Miller, 7 Smed. & M. [Miss.] 380; Maybin v. Coulon, 4 Dall. [Pa.] 298; Floyd v. Patterson, 72 Tex. 202 .)

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

44 Okla. 788 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 1, 1914

Moon, 8 Okla. 205 , 57 P. 161 ; Denny v. Wright O'Rourke, 13 Okla. 256 , 74 P. 104 ; High v. United States, 14 Okla. 399 , 78 P. 100 ; Brown v. Territory of Oklahoma, 15 Okla. 362 , 82 P. 647 ; Ford v. … In the case of Fife v.

Padgett v. Trent

61 Okla. 49 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 12, 1916

It was said in Leak et al v. … This subject has been thoroughly discussed in Mitchell v. Bell, 31 Okla. 117 , 120 Pac. 560 ; Past v. Walcott et al., 38 Okla. 715 , 134 Pac. 848 ; Ross v. Stewart, 25 Okla. 611 , 106 Pac. 870 ; Citizens’ Trading Co. v.

Ex Parte Phillips

64 Okla. 276 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 10, 1917

composed of the mayor and four commissioners, sitting as a board of commissioners. … In Harder’s Fireproof Storage & Van Co. v. City oi Chicago, 235 Ill. 58 , 85 N. E. 245 , 14 Ann.

In Re Referendum Petition No. 71, State Question No. 316

179 Okla. 381 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 18, 1937

Finding No. 24 affects 2,300 names from Oklahoma county, wherein the county registrars list of registered voters, certified by the secretary of the county election board, and filed with the county clerk (sec. 5657, O. … J., BAYLESS, V. O. J., and RILEY, BUSBY, WELCH, PHELPS, CORN, GIBSON, and HURST, JJ., concur.

Readdy v. Mallory

57 Okla. 499 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 2, 1916

“A writ of prohibition will not lie to an executive or ministerial board to prohibit it from the performance of ministerial or executive functions.” (Jamieson v. … Gen. v. Huston, 27 Okla. 607 , 113 Pac. 190 , 34 L. R. A. [N. S.] 380.)

COMANCHE NATION OF OKLAHOMA v. COFFEY

480 P.3d 271 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 17, 2020

See Brown v. Desert Christian Ctr. , 122 Cal. Rptr. 3d 590, 594-596 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011) (costs incidental to judgment of dismissal); New v. … G . v. Board of Educ . of Rochester City Sch .

Ray v. J. I. Case Plow Works Co.

169 Okla. 465 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 30, 1934

In the case of Oklahoma Natural Gas Co. v. … The above rules were approved by this court in the case of State ex rel. v. Walden, 167 Okla. 144 , 28 P. (2d) 546 . A similar interpretation of the statute is found in the case of Oklahoma Natural Gas Co. v.

Kiowa Lbr. Co. v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas R. Co.

185 Okla. 641 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 19, 1939

Our foregoing conclusion is supported, inferentially, by the decision in Indian Territory Illuminating Oil Co. v. Larkins, 168 *644 Okla. 69, 31 P.2d 608 . … Why the board or the court denied his petitions we do not know.

Gibson v. Dizney

72 Okla. 69 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 7, 1919

Hill v. Persinger, 57 Okla. 663 , 157 Pac. 744 ; Chivers v. Board of Commissioners. 62 Okla. 2 , 161 Pac. 822 , L. R. A. 1917B, 1296; National Surety Co. v. … National Surety Co. v. Hanson Builders’ Supply Co., 64 Okla. 59 , 165 Pac. 1136 ; Hawkins v. Hawkins, 52 Okla. 786 , 153 Pac. 844 .

Parker v. Walker

48 Okla. 705 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 6, 1915

Mulvane v. … The case of Newman v. Brown, 27 Kan. 121 , cited by plaintiff in error, is not in point, for there the name of the owner was omitted. In the case at bar the name* of the owner is given.

Osborn v. Moasco, Inc.

181 Okla. 140 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 2, 1937

Co. v. Driggers, supra; Ince Nursery Co. v. Sams (1918) 73 Okla. 138 , 177 P. 370 ; Freed Furniture Co. v. Criterion Advertising Co. (1935) 171 Okla. 92 , 42 P. (2d) 123 . … They are McAnally v. Cochran (1935) 170 Okla. 368 , 40 P. (2d) 955 ; Brown v. Neustadt (1930) 145 Okla. 140 , 292 P. 73 ; Brewer v. Oil Well Supply Co. (1927) 126 Okla. 108 , 258 P. 866 ; International Supply Co. v.

Hedtke v. Kukuk

93 Okla. 264 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 30, 1923

Brown, Sheriff.” … E. 269 , cited with approval by this court in Jamison v.

In Re Initiative Petition No. 2, Town of Skiatook

205 Okla. 160 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 2, 1951

This court held in North et al. v. … ” (Brazell v. Zeigler, 26 Okla. 826 , 110 P. 1052 .)