Case law

MOORE v. BLACKWELL

2014 OK CIV APP 37 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 31, 2013

Clearly, Harrison's opinion was based on what he "saw, measured [and] calculated." … But Harrison was not acting in an official capacity in this case, a fact clearly established by Moore's counsel.

Bolding v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America

63 O.B.A.J. 3691 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 3, 1992

According to the insurer, when these statutory guidelines are followed it becomes manifest that the policy language clearly and explicitly does not cover the plaintiff’s air ambulance expense. … [[Image here]] A charge is an Eligible Charge if all of these conditions are met: * It is made for a service or supply furnished to you or your Qualified Dependent.

KOPPITZ v. CHESAPEAKE ENERGY CORPORATION

2018 OK CIV APP 50 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 9, 2018

ACPERA thus clearly limits recovery of single damages in both federal law antitrust cases and state law antitrust cases against ACPERA participants. … It is well established that federal antitrust law does not preempt the assertion of antitrust claims under parallel state antitrust law.

In Re Adoption of SW

73 O.B.A.J. 719 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 18, 2001

The trial court concluded that the children's best interests were a criterion and, clearly from the transcript, placed great weight on this criterion. … The qualified expert testimony diminishes the risk of cultural bias: In re N.L., 1988 OK at ¶ 17, 754 P.2d at 867 .

Marler Ex Rel. Nowata Senior Citizens Center v. Kloehr

274 P.3d 849 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jan 26, 2012

Klochr argued that the protective order should have been denied because Marler did not establish that she had a family or dating relationship with Kloechr and Marler did not provide a copy of the complaint made to law enforcement … We express no opinion as to whether a letter, radio logs, and an incident report qualify as a "complaint" required by 22 O.S. § 60.2.A.1.

Mahone v. Hartford Life & Accident Insurance Co.

561 P.2d 142 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 13, 1976

The policy here at issue clearly insured all eligible employees, including the deceder t. … Mahone was clearly beyond sixty years of age on the date of her disability, there is simply no way in which the provisions of this policy can be fairly read to provide coverage.

NELSON v. AMERICAN HOMETOWN PUBLISHING, INC.

2014 OK CIV APP 57 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Feb 24, 2014

The principle affords legal immunity for comment by any and all members of the public and extends to virtually all matters of legitimate public interest . Its purpose is to promote the free and open exchange of ideas." … The exercise of ordinary care may be established by evidence of the custom and practice in the print media or newspaper business. Id .

Spence v. Brown-Minneapolis Tank, Co.

198 P.3d 395 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 27, 2008

BMTCo argued Oklahoma law governed Plaintiffs' claims, 6 and that BMTCo owed no duty to Plaintiffs, unless deemed the alter-ego of BMT-MW, in which case, the workers' compensation exclusive remedy doctrine immunized it from … The policy underlying imposition of strict products liability is well established: [The justification for the strict lability has been said to be that the seller, by marketing his product for use and consumption, has undertaken

NIEMI v. CITY OF TULSA

369 P.3d 68 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Feb 19, 2016

The evidentiary materials undisputedly establish the Tulsa County Democratic Party and the Tulsa County Republican Party as the governing bodies of their respective political parties in the City of Tulsa. 116 Even so, there … Thus, and even if the Commissioners were not, in fact, appointed by the governing boards of the respective County political parties, the appointees clearly acted in the good faith belief they were properly appointed, and

Bunch v. TERPENNING

229 P.3d 574 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 19, 2009

The record establishes that Terpenning made ten loans that would satisfy the definition in § 3-104. … Foreclosure for nonpayment is clearly an "enforeement of rights" prohibited under section 3-502(1), and we *581 find this argument without merit.

Thornton v. Ford Motor Co.

297 P.3d 413 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 28, 2012

To qualify as a "New Motor Vehicle Dealer" under either version, a dealer must hold "a bona fide contract or franchise in effect with a manufacturer." See § 562(2) of the Act. … The Act at issue here clearly does not delineate any required conduct from motor vehicle manufacturers, like Ford, during the approval process under § 565.3.

ELIAS v. CITY OF TULSA

2022 OK CIV APP 18 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 17, 2021

Clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, material, probative and substantial competent evidence; 6. Arbitrary or capricious; 7. Procured by fraud; or 8. … The error with Elias' proposition is that "all" means "all" in § 46H because the statute contains no qualifier or other limitation, such as "all, except . . ." or "all, not including . . . ."

Summa Engineering, Inc. v. Crawley Petroleum Corp.

286 P.3d 653 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 7, 2011

After Sum-ma rested, Defendants demurred to the evi *657 dence, arguing a qualified proposal is a new proposal under 15 0.98.2001 § 71 and their response to the proposal "was more than qualified. … T 19 Comparison of Summa's original proposal with Defendants' July 10, 2008 letter clearly reveals they offered new terms which completely changed the proposal and must be viewed as a rejection or counterproposal.

BALES v. STATE ex rel. OKLA. REAL ESTATE APPRAISER BOARD

492 P.3d 625 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 3, 2020

Pearce was qualified to be certified. Mr. Bales testified: "I've been practicing or appraising for ten years now, so I have a pretty good idea if someone's qualified to appraise or not, and [Mr. … Bales testified, "I've been practicing or appraising for ten years now, so I have a pretty good idea if someone's qualified to appraise or not, and [Mr.

Glass v. Carlile

640 P.2d 996 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 1, 1981

Plaintiffs did not rely on the use of restricted funds to establish the restricted character of the land in question, nor on a restrictive deed provision, hence 42 C.J.S. … to take at the appraisement from a partition sale, the former involving a continuing qualified restriction against alienation, and Grisso v.

GLOVER CONSTRUCTION CO., INC. v. STATE ex rel. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION

326 P.3d 547 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Feb 14, 2014

Without explanation of its reason(s), the trial court denied GCC's motion for new trial. {18 Clearly the trial court had authority under Rule 13(f) of the Rules of the District Courts of Oklahoma, 12 O.S. … If the Doctrine applies to States, which we do not decide, it only "operates to insulate the government from liability for certain inabilities to perform contractual obligations," which immunity is afforded only if its performance

Creekmore v. Redman Industries, Inc.

671 P.2d 73 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 21, 1983

not decide whether Appel- *80 lees were a “prevailing party”, as we find that an award of attorney’s fees based upon § 936 would be improper, because the lease agreement of real property and appurtenances thereto do not qualify … An action for termination or forfeiture of the instant lease agreement for waste clearly does not fall within § 936. For the foregoing reasons we affirm. AFFIRMED. REYNOLDS, P.J., and YOUNG, J., concur. 1 . 6 Edw.

Wilkerson v. City of Pauls Valley

72 O.B.A.J. 1878 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Feb 13, 2001

Clearly, this threat implicates the public interest at large and the public treasury. … Wilkerson must establish that the decisions below constituted a clearly erroneous conclusion and judgment, against reason and evidence, in order to demonstrate an abuse of discretion. See Green Bay Packaging, Inc. v.

Embry v. Innovative Aftermarket Systems L.P.

198 P.3d 388 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 18, 2008

The contract made no mention of insurance and TLC was not qualified to be in the insurance business. The Court ruled that the contract was an insurance contract because it met the definition of an insurance contract. … The Summary Judgment record does not establish that the DRWA addendum was actually included in the assignment of the financing agreement from DSC to TFCU.

NBI Services, Inc. v. Ward

132 P.3d 619 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 22, 2005

We disagree. ¶ 20 As noted above, it is well-established that Oklahoma district courts have jurisdiction to afford relief for claims of nuisance and negligence. … It also is established that legislation “cannot abrogate the common law by implication; rather, its alteration must be clearly and plainly expressed.” Tate v.