Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
2,251 results
0.37s
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Mar 7, 1986
Absent a rule setting out the procedure to be used by the Board to change a beneficial use designation to a lower designation because of a mistake, the Board may not make such a change. See, Adams v. … At such time as the Board properly adopts such a rule or regulation, the Board may change a beneficial use designation to a less stringent one to correct a factual error. V .
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jan 20, 1971
Until such time as the oath of office is taken by the newly elected Board member the position will remain filled by the previous Board member. … Cotteral v. Barber, 34 Okl. 533 , 126 P. 211 (1912); Barrows v. Garvey, 67 Ariz. 202 , 193 P.2d 913 (1948); Lovell v. Democratic Central Committee, 327 S.W.2d 387 (Ark., 1959); Azevedo v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · May 4, 1992
TEXAS OKLAHOMA EXPRESS V. SORENSON, 652 P.2D 285, 287; ROTRAMEL V. PUBLIC SERVICE CO., 546 P.2D 1015, 1017 (OKLA.1975). … 2) THE RULES AND REGULATIONS PROMULGATED BY THE ARCHITECTURAL BOARD HAVE THE EFFECT OF LAW.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jun 15, 1970
In consequence, the Order of the Board of County Commissioners is presently in effect. In Edge v. … In Butler v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Aug 22, 1975
The applicable rule of statutory construction is stated in Shriver v. Graham, Okl. … Hedges v. Groom, 194 Okl. 384 , 151 P.2d 936 (1944). It is evident that an individual who meets statutory qualifications would be otherwise eligible to compete for the position.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jul 22, 1988
HESS V. EXCISE BOARD OF MCCURTAIN COUNTY, 698 P.2D 930 (OKLA. 1985). … SEE GOLDEN V. OKFUSKEE COUNTY ELECTION BOARD, 723 P.2D 982, 983 (OKLA. 1986); AND BOARD OF REGENTS OF OKLAHOMA AGRICULTURAL COLLEGES V. UPDEQRAFF, 237 P.2D 131, 138 (OKLA. 1951).
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jul 26, 1989
State v. Tapp, 380 P.2D 260, 265 (Okla. 1963). See also Oklahoma Natural Gas Co. v. Corporation Commission, 216 P. 917 (Okla. 1923); Board of Education of City of Okmulgee v. … State Board of Education, 200 P.2d 394 (Okla. 1948); Curtis v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Aug 29, 1975
Our previous opinion answered your question in the negative and relied upon a recent opinion of the Florida Supreme Court in Canney v. … In State v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Mar 15, 1978
Johnson v. Ward, 541 P.2d 182 (Okl., 1975). A plain reading of these statutes reveals that the district attorney can give opinions, advice, and provide defense services only to county officers and employees. … In an analogous case, Board of County Commissioners v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Nov 23, 1976
SUPREME COURT DECISION — POWER OF BOARD TO PROHIBIT MISLEADING ADS Pursuant to the decisions of the United States Supreme Court (Virginia State Board of Pharmacy et al., v. … What effect does the United States Supreme Court decision, Virginia State Board of Pharmacy, et al. v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Nov 23, 1998
Poulous v. … Poulous v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Aug 22, 1973
In Stephenson, et al. v. … Board of County Commissioners, 468 P.2d 501 (Okl. 1970); and Boydston v. State, 277 P.2d 138 (Okl. 1954).
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Aug 6, 1969
In the case of City of Phoenix v. … For other cases adhering to the same general rule, see Hanson v. Hoffman, C.C.A. Okla. 1940, 113 F.2d 780 ; Thompson v. Board of Education, 57 N.J.L. 628 , 31 A. 168 ; Ex parte Beck, D.C. 245 F. 967 ; Kirby Lbr. Co. v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · May 20, 1998
Board of Education of Oklahoma City v. Cloudman, 92 P.2d 837 , 840-41 (Okla. 1939). ¶ 5 Cloudman was affirmed by the Oklahoma Supreme Court in Independent School District No. 8 of Seiling v. … Rural Water District No. 3, Pushmataha County v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Nov 15, 1976
Further, as to the definition of the term "executive session", Attorney General's Opinion 68-247 adopted the definition set forth in Blum v. Board of Zoning, 149 N.Y.S.2d 5 , and Thomas v. … Of course, at the close of the evidentiary hearing, a board may deliberate in closed session, in the same manner as a jury does in a court case, to arrive at its decision. See Stillwater Savings and Loan Association v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Aug 18, 1992
City of Tulsa v. … Pursuant to Board of Regents of the Univ. of Oklahoma v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Dec 30, 1971
In Oklahoma Water Resources Board v. Central Oklahoma M.C. … In reply to your second question, the authority granted to administrative boards within the State of Oklahoma is found in the case of Oklahoma Tax Commission, et al v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jun 6, 1969
Boards of Education — Travel Expenses A board of education may legally pay the expenses of one or more of its members to attend the National School Administrators Convention and the National School Boards Association Convention … The board must still determine within its own discretion what travel is necessary, suitable, and proper for the needs of the particular school district. In the case of Kay County, Excise Board v. Atchison, T. S.F.R.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Mar 2, 1991
SETTLES V. BOARD OF EDUCATION. MCCURTAIN COUNTY. OKLAHOMA, 389 P.2D 356 (1964), AND HAS BEEN REAFFIRMED IN SUBSEQUENT OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL. … NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION AND THE STATE THAT WOULD VIOLATE ARTICLE V, SECTION 23.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Feb 24, 1972
** Summary ** CALLING SPECIAL SCHOOL BOARD ELECTION A local board of education of a school district is not authorized to call a special election for purposes of filling a vacancy on said board; a county election board is … matter prevails over a general statute which does not refer to particular subject matter but does contain language which might be broad enough to cover the subject matter if a special statute was not in existence, Reubin v.
Cited 0 timesPublished
Ask Donna