Case law

State Ex Rel. Schones v. Town of Canute

64 O.B.A.J. 2091 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 29, 1993

The action clearly is one to vindicate *440 public rights in insuring that public funds are properly spent. … It was not until the 17th Century that Parliament passed legislation establishing fixed time limits within which an action must be brought.

Merrell v. Merrell

712 P.2d 35 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 24, 1985

This does not appear to reconcile with the intent of our adoption statutes, which is clearly expressed in the provisions of 10 O.S.Supp.1984 § 60.16, declaring that it is the final decree which establishes the new parent/ … not known and this fact is attested to by affidavit of the consenting parent, legal guardian, or person having legal custody of the child, notice by publication shall be given by publishing notice one time in a newspaper qualified

Bill Hodges Truck Co. v. Gillum

774 P.2d 1063 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 31, 1989

Z., the worker has “severe coronary artery disease which is clearly inoperable” and that “the next medical treatment necessary ... is a heart transplantation.” … It does not establish the changed condition as a legitimate consequence of the accidental injury.

Tibbetts v. Sight 'N Sound Appliance Centers, Inc.

74 O.B.A.J. 2538 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 16, 2003

Supreme Court applies a functional test to immunity questions. … When judges adjudicate they have absolute immunity; when they legislate they have legislative immunity and when they act as executives, they have only executive immunity. In Supreme Court of Virginia v.

Roudebush v. Snell

103 Okla. 291 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 21, 1924

The interpretation placed upon this contract by the trial court is borne out, we think, by the conduct of both parties to the contract in respect of delivering the qualified possession of the well to the defendant a day or … The exhibits introduced by the plaintiff and the conduct of the plaintiff at the time these exhibits were delivered to him clearly indicate, we think, that the plaintiff did not regard the contract as being wholly executed

Phoenix Printing Co. v. Durham

32 Okla. 575 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 6, 1912

In order to determine this question it is necessary to clearly state the facts. … It also clearly appears from the evidence that this belt and pulley merely operated in the disc or paste wheel, and did not in any way touch the paste box.

DANI v. MILLER

374 P.3d 779 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 29, 2016

In other words, if validly established claims exceed the established reserve, incoming unclaimed property will be held in reserve to pay valid claims until all established claims are paid, Appellant asserts this constitutes … 'A legislative act is presumed to be constitutional and will be upheld unless it is clearly, palpably and plainly inconsistent with the Constitution. Rural Water Sewer and Solid Waste Mgmt. v.

Territory of Oklahoma Ex Rel. McGuire v. Board of Trustees

13 Okla. 605 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 4, 1904

of the county shall vote by ballot for or against establishing such high school. … As to the question thus submitted the language of the act is clearly a limitation upon the powers of the election board.

Mayberry v. Gaddis

88 Okla. 286 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 6, 1923

It is also contended that some qualified voters were not permitted to vote, but the rule established by his court in that regard is that one who seeks to have an election declared void and set aside on the ground that by … There is no foundation for the latter claim, as the question submitted clearly showed that the entire amount of $675,000 should be authorized to be issued for the purpose of meeting like amounts to be furnished by the state

PARSONS v. DISTRICT COURT OF PUSHMATAHA COUNTY

2017 OK 97 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 12, 2017

During the required period of hospitalization the Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services shall have the person examined by two qualified psychiatrists or one such psychiatrist and one qualified clinical … The trial judge's June 6, 2012, order clearly deviated from the aforementioned statutory language. Journal Entry, Orig.

Smith, Secretary of State v. State Hepburn

28 Okla. 235 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 15, 1910

The better opinion would clearly be that Congress could not impose as ah obligation upon a state at the time of its admission into the Union such a restriction as it had no original power to enact or enforce.” … The seventeenth and eighteenth sections related to the establishment of a system of public instruction in the city.

Williams v. Johnson

32 Okla. 247 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 12, 1912

allotted said land; that by act of Congress approved March 3, 1901 (Act March 3, 1901, c. 808, 21 St. at L. 1447) , Selin Taylor was made a citizen of the United States, and thereby entitled to all rights, privileges, and immunities … This seems to be the settled and established holdings of the courts relative to this question.

Chouteau v. Chouteau

49 Okla. 105 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 12, 1915

A general denial, followed by specific admissions, will be limited and qualified thereby. … This was clearly the intention of Congress in adopting the chapter referred to, and the court committed error in sustaining the demurrer of the plaintiffs to that part of the defendants’ answer.

Holleyman v. Holleyman

78 P.3d 921 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 14, 2003

The district court clearly erred in bottoming its dismissal on "lack of jurisdiction." B. … T20 An interspousal agreement that does not offend any public policy principles qualifies for judicial approval.

CLOUDI MORNINGS, LLC. v. CITY OF BROKEN ARROW

454 P.3d 753 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 19, 2019

." 10 It did not define "retail marijuana establishment." … clarify, as opposed to change, the prior statute. 20 A subsequent statute clarifying a prior statute can be used to determine the meaning of the prior statute even if the interpretation affects alleged vested rights. 21 ¶19 Clearly

City of Tulsa v. Roberts

188 Okla. 249 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 1, 1940

, we clearly recognized that the alleged defect inherent in the plan must be the result of the exercise of discretion on the part of the officials authorized to act legislatively or judicially for the city in such matters … Thus, throughout our opinion, we made it clear that the basis for immunity from liability was the action of the governing body in adopting the plan.

Prager's Paris Fashion v. Seidenbach

113 Okla. 271 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 22, 1925

'< fits from the destruction or interruption of an established business may he recovered where it is made reasonably certain by competent -proof "bat the amount of the loss actually is; and such damages must he established … It clearly appears that the entire action of the defendant in its prior suit against the plaintiff sought injunctive relief only, and that the services rendered by the attorney for the plaintiff in that action were rendered

Collier v. Reese

223 P.3d 966 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 17, 2009

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor … In other words, the speech of lawyers representing clients in pending cases may be regulated under a less demanding standard than that established for regulation of the press. .

Hill v. Burnett

69 Okla. 54 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 8, 1918

That Frank Hill is the duly appointed, qualified, and acting guardian of the plaintiff. That Bates B. Burnett is the duly appointed, qualified, and acting guardian of the defendant. … in trust for- the plaintiff, and that the defendant be required to execute and deliver to the plaintiff a due and proper conveyance of said lands, and, upon the failure of the defendant so to do, that the decree herein, establishing

Akin v. Harris

138 Okla. 30 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 30, 1929

It appears that Stewart had been elected for a term, to which he had qualified, and had be'en reelected. … •‘But, on the other hand, where the appointment or election is made for a definite term or during good behavior, and the removal is to be. for cause, it is now clearly established by the great weight of authority that the