Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
2,251 results
0.23s
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jun 18, 1969
The general rule concerning powers of an administrative agency was expressed in the first paragraph of the syllabus in Boydston v. … board itself."
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jan 30, 1976
Becknell v. State Industrial Court, 512 P.2d 1180 (1973). … Thomas v. State, Okl. Cr., 404 P.2d 71 (1965).
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jun 10, 1998
DiMauro v. Oklahoma Board of Medical Examiners, 769 P.2d 759 (Okla. 1989). … The statute does not specify the way the Board is authorized to do this, so it is left to the judgment and discretion of the Board. See Application of State Board of Medical Examiners, 206 P.2d 211 (Okla. 1949).
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jun 24, 2011
Jobe v. State ex rel. Dep't of Pub. Safety , 243 P.3d 1171 , 1175 (Okla. 2010). … Rogers v. Quiktrip Corp. , 230 P.3d 853 , 859 (Okla. 2010).
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 · 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 · Jul 19, 1999
Id. ; see also Hodges v. Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 580 P.2d 980 , 982 (Okla. 1978); cf. Hodges v. Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 48 OKLA. B.J. 31 (1976) ( opinion withdrawn, 49 OKLA. … See Imperial Irrigation District v. Water Resources Control Board, 275 Cal. Rptr. 250 , 265-6 (Cal.Ct.App. 1990); In re Permit Application No. 37-7108, 530 P.2d 924 , 931-32 (Idaho 1974).
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jan 16, 1976
Western Paint and Chemical Company v. Board of Commissioners of Garfield County, 18 P.2d 888 , 161 Okl. 300 . … Also, see Board of County Commissioners of Okmulgee County v. Alexander, 42 P.2d 884 (1935).
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 · Aug 6, 1980
Roberts v. Ledgerwood, 134 Okl. 152 , 272 P. 448 (1929). Elias v. … In Tulsa Exposition Fair Corp. v. Board of Co.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jul 2, 1975
and Retirement Board to forward copies of minutes of their monthly meetings to the State Board? … City of Bethany v. Hill, 509 P.2d 1364 (1973).
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Sep 8, 1989
WHEN THE EXCISE BOARD UNDERTAKES TO REVIEW THE ESTIMATE OF NEEDS PURSUANT TO 68 O.S. 2487 (2) OR TO REVISE THE ESTIMATE OF NEEDS PURSUANT TO 68 O.S. 2487 (5), IT CLEARLY EXERCISES ITS LAWFUL DISCRETION. SEE ABEL V. … MADDEN, 738 P. 2D 1340 (OKL. 1987); ROGERS V. EXCISE BOARD OF GREER COUNTY, 701 P 2D 754 (OKL. 1984); AND SUMMEY V. TISDALE, 658 P. 2D 464 (OKL. 1982).
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Nov 21, 1995
State v. … Under the logic of State v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Aug 21, 1970
(Emphasis added) In the case of Carter Oil Company v. … Lincoln National Life Insurance Company v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · May 23, 1979
The basic principle concerning the power of an administrative board to adopt rules and regulations was expressed in W. S. Dickey Clay Mfg. Co. v. Ferguson Inc. … Agencies may not, by rule making, exceed the scope of their statutory, see Adams v. Professional Practices Commission, 524 P.2d 932 (Okla. 1974).
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jul 22, 1976
Concerning that language of Article XXIII, Section 10, the Court in Coyle v. … It is clear from the foregoing, that the Court in Coyle v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Apr 4, 1990
This remedy was addressed by the Oklahoma Supreme Court in Adair County Excise Board v. Board of County Commissioners of Adair County, 438 P.2d 484 (Okla. 1968). … Adair County at 488; see also, Tulsa County Excise Board v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jul 15, 2004
of Examiners in Optometry ("Board"). … State Bd. of Embalmers Funeral Dir. v. Guardian Funeral Home, 429 P.2d 732 , 736 (Okla. 1967) (quoting Moore v.
Cited 0 timesPublished
Ask Donna