Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
2,251 results
0.84s
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Oct 2, 1975
Hess v. D. T. Draffen and Co., 74 S.W. 440, 441 , 99 Mo. App. 580 , State, ex rel. Freeman v. Abstractors Board of Examiners, 45 P.2d 668 , 671 , 99 Mont. 564 . … See Application of Richardson, supra; Freeman v. Abstractors Board of Examiners, supra; and the discussion regarding the meaning of "other system of indexes" above.
Cited 0 timesPublishedQuestion Submitted by: The Honorable Dana Prieto, Oklahoma State Senate, District 34
2024 OK AG 6 · Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Apr 26, 2024
COM'RS Discussed at Length 1924 OK 396 , 231 P. 250 , 104 Okla. 260 , BOARD OF COM'RS OF TULSA COUNTY v. NEWS-DISPATCH PRINT Discussed 2010 OK 5 , 237 P.3d 134 , ESTATE OF CROWELL v. … F.O.P., Lodge No. 188 v. Board of County Commissioners of Tulsa Co. Discussed at Length 1982 OK 133 , 658 P.2d 464 , Summey v. Tisdale Discussed at Length 1951 OK 262 , 236 P.2d 987 , 205 Okla. 233 , JOHNSTON v.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Dec 27, 1972
The general rule in regard to whether a statute acts retrospectively or not is set forth in State v. … This rule was recently upheld and followed in the case of Sunray DX Oil Company v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Sep 10, 1991
RUSSELL PETROLEUM COMPANY V. WALKER, 19 P.2D 582, 587 (OKLA. 1933). IN THE RUSSELL CASE, THE STATE SUPREME COURT FOUND THAT GOVERNOR WILLIAM H. … ALSO SEE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION NO. 77-191, WHICH HELD THAT THE OKLAHOMA WATER RESOURCES BOARD, BY VIRTUE OF AN EXECUTIVE ORDER, CANNOT GAIN NEW POWER AND AUTHORITY.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Apr 1, 1969
Also, 59 O.S. 72 [ 59-72 ] (1968), provides: "The State Board of Barber Examiners shall admit any applicant to the regular examination for license to practice the trade of a barber within the meaning of this Act who is at … The Supreme Court of the State of Oklahoma in Sanders v. Oklahoma Employment Security Commission, Okl., 430 P.2d 789 (1967), held in the second paragraph of the syllabus: "2.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Sep 7, 1978
The board of directors is appointed by state officers, and the people of the district have no voice in their selection . . . . … The purpose of the act is analogous to that of an irrigation district, and in Wood v. Imperial Irr.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Dec 27, 1972
Wentz v. Thomas, 159 Okl. 124 , 15 P.2d 65 (1932). … McVicker v. Board of Commissioners of Caddo County, Oklahoma, Okl., 442 P.2d 297 . Shaw v. Grumbine, 137 Okl. 95 , 278 P. 311 (1929).
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Mar 16, 1989
Coop. v. … Leasing v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Nov 7, 1977
McVicker v. Board of County Commissioners, Okl., 442 P.2d 297 (1968). … Bohn v. Divine, Okl. App., 544 P.2d 916 (1975).
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jul 6, 1988
Board of Regents of Oklahoma Agricultural Colleges v. Updegraff, 237 P.2d 131 , 138 (Okla. 1951). An ex post facto law is one which provides for a punishment for an act which was innocent when committed. … . ¶ 3 Your question as to whether this law constitutes an unconstitutional ex post facto law has been squarely answered by the Oklahoma Supreme Court in Golden v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jul 11, 1975
Section 421, supra, provides for the bank to have, upon approval by the State Banking Board and military installation commander, a detached facility on any military installation located in Oklahoma. … The term "branch" was interpreted in the case of Jackson v. First National Banks of Valdosta, 246 F. Supp. 134 (M.D. Ga. 1965) to mean the following: ". . .
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Sep 4, 1970
Such compensation . . . shall be ascertained by a board of commissioners of not less than three freeholders . . . . … Co. v. Oliver, 17 Okl. 589 , 87 P. 423 (1906); Oklahoma City v. Wells, 185 Okl. 369 , 91 P.2d 1077 (1939); Grand River Dam Authority v. Grand-Hydro, 200 Okl. 157 , 201 P.2d 225 (1947); Cities Service Gas Co. v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · May 31, 1973
The general rule is found in Poafpybitty v. … Also in Ramsey v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Feb 20, 1986
Those states which have accorded recognition by full faith and credit are New Mexico, Jim v. CIT Financial Services Corporation , 533 P.2d 751 (N.M. 1975); Idaho, Sheppard v. … Those states which have extended recognition via comity are Arizona, Brown v. Babbit Ford, Inc ., 571 P.2d 689 , 695 (Ariz.App. 1977), and Oregon, Matter of the Marriage of Red Fox , 542 P.2d 918 (Or.App. 1975).
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jun 26, 1973
See Bowles v. … See Martin v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · May 18, 1970
In the case of Reed v. … See Reed v. Kuzirian, supra; Ketring v. Sturges, 372 S.W.2d 104 (Mo.Sup.Ct. 1963); Fields v. Dist. of Columbia, 232 A.2d 300 (1967); and New Jersey State Board of Optometrists v. Reiss, 83 N.J.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Nov 19, 1985
Hughes Drilling Co. v. Morgan , 648 P.2d 32 (Okla. 1982). … The cost of said certificate and lapel pin shall be reimbursed to the Committee by the agency, board, commission, or office that made the nomination ." (Emphasis added).
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Feb 13, 1970
"Eighty per cent (80%) of all sums held by the State Treasurer to the credit of the Special Indemnity Fund may by order of the Commissioner of the State Insurance Fund, with the approval of the Board of Managers of the State … In Flecz v. Harmstad, 304 Pa. 302 , 155 A. 875 , 77 A.L.R. 875 , it was stated: "The word 'money' is popularly and correctly used as indicating property of every description."
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Aug 7, 1980
Miller v. … Guthrie Daily Leader v. Cameron, supra. Farley v. Board of Education, 62 Okl. 181 , 162 P. 797 , 799 (191?).
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jun 17, 1971
(Emphasis added) In Robinson v. … The right of a fireman to receive overtime pay, and the amount to which he is entitled, is solely dependent upon the terms of the statute governing the pay of the fireman, City of Temple v. Brown, Tex. Civ.
Cited 0 timesPublished
Ask Donna