Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
2,251 results
1.18s
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Dec 2, 1975
Hisel v. State, Okl., 264 P.2d 375 (1953). In McVicker v. … In Tobin v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jun 27, 2001
The Oklahoma Supreme Court has ruled that the powers of a school board are like those of a municipal corporation ( see Joint Sch. Dist. No. 132 v. … In Way v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Aug 6, 1980
Carl v. Board of Regents, supra at 914. … As expressed in Carl v. Board of Regents, supra, and Sanders v. Benton, supra, it is clear that the Open Meeting Act requirements apply to such an association.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Feb 2, 1994
GRAND RIVER DAM AUTHORITY V. STATE, 645 P.2D 1011 (OKLA.1982). IN ADDITION, CONSTRUCTION THAT WOULD LEAD TO AN ABSURDITY MUST BE AVOIDED AND A RATIONALE CONSTRUCTION MUST BE EMPLOYED. LEDBETTER V. … TAYLOR V. SPECIAL INDEMNITY FUND, 804 P.2D 431, 432 (OKLA.1990).
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jul 5, 2000
supervising physician and as approved by the State Board of Medical Licensure and Supervision after consultation with the State Board of Pharmacy on the Physician Assistant Drug Formulary. … See Cox v. Dawson, 911 P.2d 272 , 276 (Okla. 1996).
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Nov 5, 1992
IS THERE A PROHIBITION OR CONFLICT OF INTEREST FOR VERD ARK CA BOARD MEMBERS TO SERVE AS EODD BOARD MEMBERS OR OFFICERS? … CARTWRIGHT V. GEORGIA PACIFIC CORP., 663 P.2D 718 (OKLA.1982).
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jun 7, 1991
City of Tulsa v. Midland Valley R. Co., 168 F.2d 252 , 254 (10th Cir. 1948), citing City of Tulsa v. … Mid-Continent Pipe Line Co. v. Stephens County, Excise Board, 312 P.2d 883 (Okla. 1957).
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jun 8, 1987
IN TULSA CLASSROOM TEACHERS ASSOCIATION V. STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, 601 P.2d 99 (OKL. 1979), THE SUPREME COURT DISCUSSED THE HEARING PROCEDURE BEFORE THE STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION. … IN THAT CASE, THE SUPREME COURT FOUND THAT IN HEARINGS BEFORE THE STATE BOARD, THE BOARD WAS SUBJECT TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT, TO THE EXTENT THAT ACT DID NOT CONFLICT WITH SPECIFIC STATUTES.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Aug 31, 1978
Hayes v. U.S., 112 F.2d 417 (1940); City of Duncan v. Bingham, Okl., 394 P.2d 456 (1964); State ex rel. Nesbitt v. Rambo, Okl., 448 P.2d 1012 (1969). … (Citing Aebli v. Board of Education, 145 P.2d 601 , 62 Cal.App.2d 706 (1944); and Rible v. Hughes, 160 P.2d 455 , 24 Cal.2d 437 , 154 A.L.R 137 (1944) See also, 68 Am.Jur.2d "Schools", 144.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Nov 5, 1992
IS THERE A PROHIBITION OR CONFLICT OF INTEREST FOR VERD ARK CA BOARD MEMBERS TO SERVE AS EODD BOARD MEMBERS OR OFFICERS? … CARTWRIGHT V. GEORGIA PACIFIC CORP., 663 P.2D 718 (OKLA.1982).
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Nov 17, 1975
PROHIBITED FROM SERVING AS A MEMBER OF THE BOARD BY VIRTUE OF 51 O.S. 1971 6 [ 51-6 ] OR ARTICLE V , SECTION 23 OKLAHOMA CONSTITUTION; HOWEVER, UNDER THE SEPARATION OF POWERS PROVISION CONTAINED IN ARTICLE IV , SECTION 1 … CITE: ARTICLE V, SECTION 2, 53 O.S. 1971 16 [ 53-16 ], 53 O.S. 1971 17 [ 53-17 ], 53 O.S. 1971 18 [ 53-18 ], 53 O.S. 1971 1 [ 53-1 ] (GERALD E. WEIS)
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Mar 16, 1998
¶ 1 Your questions deal with the authority of the Oklahoma Crime Victims Compensation Board ("the Victims Board") to expend money. … Marley v. Cannon, 618 P.2d 401 , 405 (Okla. 1980) (citations omitted). ¶ 4 Your first question asks whether there are any limitations on the use of monies collected pursuant to the Act.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Nov 7, 1988
See, Vette v. Childers, 228 P. 145 (Okla. 1924); Veterans of Foreign Wars v. Childers, 171 P.2d 618 (Okla. 1946). … Isaacs v. Oklahoma City, 437 P.2d 229 , 233 (Okla. 1967); A.G. Opin. No. 83-189. In this case, the Legislature has set forth detailed guidelines that are mandatory in nature and must be adhered to by the Board.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Mar 16, 1995
Colorado Polytechnic College v. State Board for Community Colleges and Occupational Education, 476 P.2d 38 (Colo. 1970). … State v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · May 22, 1980
Woods v. Board of Equalization, Okla., 517 P.2d 430 (1973); Bretts v. Commissioner of Land Office, 17 Okla. 64 , 110 P. 766 (1910). … The Supreme Court in Woods v. State Board of Equalization, supra, expressly held that federal revenue sharing funds were subject to the state's appropriation process.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Apr 1, 1994
JACKSON V. INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 16 OF PAYNE CO., 648 P.2D 26 (OKLA.1982). THE LEGISLATIVE INTENT IS TO BE ASCERTAINED FROM THE WHOLE ACT IN LIGHT OF ITS GENERAL PURPOSE AND OBJECT. MIDWEST CITY V. … UDALL V. UDALL, 613 P.2D 742 (OKLA.1980). CONSTRUCTIONS WHICH WOULD LEAD TO ABSURDITY ARE TO BE AVOIDED; RATHER, THE LANGUAGE IS TO BE READ IN A RATIONAL MANNER. CITY OF NORMAN V. LIDELL, 596 P.2D 879 (OKLA.1979).
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Apr 1, 1994
YOUR QUESTION ASKS WHETHER A PERSON WHO IS EMPLOYED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE MUNICIPAL PUBLIC WORKS AUTHORITY MAY SERVE ON THE BOARD OF THE GRDA AS AN "OFFICER OF A MUNICIPALITY." … SEE ALSO, OLIVER V. CITY OF TULSA, 654 P.2D 607 (OKLA.1982)."
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Mar 11, 1971
OPINION — AG — **** BOARD OF LEGISLATION COMPENSATION — WITHOUT LEGISLATIVE POWERS **** (1) THE BOARD OF LEGISLATIVE COMPENSATION CANNOT REQUIRE MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATURE TO PASS SPECIFIC LEGISLATION AS A CONDITION FOR RECEIVING … CITE: ARTICLE V, SECTION 21/ARTICLE IV, SECTION 1 (LARRY DERRYBERRY)
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Nov 20, 2007
Riffe Petroleum Co. v. Great Nat. Corp., Inc. , 614 P.2d 576 , 579 (Okla. 1980). As the Supreme Court of New Mexico observed in State, ex rel . Gonzales v. … Campbell v. Campbell , 450 P.2d 203 , 205 (Okla. 1966).
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Aug 13, 1968
Tharel v. Board of County Com'rs of Creek County, 188 Okl. 184 , 107 P.2d 542 , determines the answer to your first question. … We feel that it is appropriate — though not necessary in answering your specific questions to call your attention to certain dicta in the case of Headley v.
Cited 0 timesPublished
Ask Donna