Case law

R & R ENGINEERING CO., INC. v. BOARD OF REVIEW OESC

2014 OK CIV APP 26 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Feb 14, 2014

Employer specifically submits its evidence clearly established Claimant resigned without good cause and his voluntary resignation disqualified him from receiving benefits pursuant to §2-404. ¶10 Commission counters if an … Labor Cite Name Level 40 O.S. 1 -108, Indian Tribes or Tribal Units - Benefits - Contributions or Payments - Extended Benefits - Delinquencies - No Waiver of Sovereign Immunity Cited 40 O.S. 2 -404, Leaving Work Voluntarily

Deal v. Brooks

389 P.3d 375 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 24, 2016

The constitutional right at issue—described in GJA as a child’s “clearly established constitutional right to be reasonably safe from harm when placed in the state’s custody,” GJA, ¶37 (footnote omitted)—is, as explained in … See Bosh, ¶32. 12 CONCLUSION ¶ 56 “[Established precedent” in Oklahoma has “refused to construe the [GTCA] as providing blanket immunity,” especially where that immunity would “render the Constitutional protections afforded

LOPEZ v. BD. OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF CHEROKEE COUNTY

383 P.3d 790 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 6, 2016

Based on this record, the Board has not established that it mowed the entire width of its “statutory-right-of-way” at this intersection. … Supp. 2013 155(10). ¶ 28 The Board argues that “[i]t is clearly undisputed that the growth of vegetation is a natural, condition of the property of Defendant Board.”

Grant v. Grant

69 O.B.A.J. 3286 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Aug 7, 1998

Section 601~314(A) is clearly intended to preclude the establishment of personal jurisdiction based upon “participation ... in a proceeding.” The Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act, 43 O.S.1991 §§ 301 et seq. … Because of the immunity conferred by that section, David could not refer to those acts in attempting to establish personal jurisdiction in Canadian County. ¶ 11 David also suggests that the trial court had jurisdiction because

Steelman v. Oklahoma Police Pension & Retirement System

128 P.3d 1090 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 5, 2005

Likewise, Trustees are immune from individual liability under § 1988. McFall v. … Bednar, 407 F.3d 1081 (10th Cir.2005): "The doctrine of qualified immunity, therefore, shields government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages arising from 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims

Davidson v. Cantrell

65 O.B.A.J. 2101 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 14, 1993

The exemption has been construed to render public lands immune from tax resale, and no legislative enactment can abridge or qualify that exemption. … Unless the constitutional provision which grants the exemptions is self-executing, the Legislature may qualify, curtail or annul any exemption.

Mullins v. Oklahoma Public Employees Retirement System

122 P.3d 872 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Apr 22, 2005

¶ 13 The Act does not, however, go so far as to require veterans be treated better than non-veterans. 27 Nor is the Act invoked when ail similarly situated employees are denied a benefit of employment that is granted to qualifying … USERRA does not mandate the relief sought by Mullins. 29 ¶ 15 Because Mullins did not establish a right to such retirement credits under state or federal laws, he did not establish a property right subject to due process

Gilmore v. Board of Commissioners

147 P.3d 296 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 26, 2006

Summary judgment is appropriate where the record establishes no substantial controversy of material fact and the prevailing party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Brown v. … Section 155(15) clearly states that Commissioners are immune from lability for failing to initially place warnings of hazards normally associated with the use of roadways.

KRIMBILL v. TALARICO

417 P.3d 1240 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 27, 2017

Nevertheless, the Act clearly contemplates that the pleadings may be considered . 7 IV. … If so, the email may qualify as a "fair and true report of a judicial proceeding."

Bryson v. Oklahoma County ex rel. Oklahoma County Detention Center

261 P.3d 627 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 30, 2011

City of Oklahoma City, 2009 OK 4, ¶ 20 , 212 P.3d 1158 , 1167: To construe § 155(4) as providing blanket immunity to political subdivisions for any claim arising from law enforcement would not conform to established precedent … Although the Fourth Amendment is made applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, the United States Supreme Court clearly established in Graham that the Fourth Amendment is the substantive law providing a basis

LOPEZ v. BD. OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF CHEROKEE COUNTY

383 P.3d 790 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 6, 2016

Based on this record, the Board has not established that it mowed the entire width of its "statutory-right-of-way" at this intersection. … Supp. 2013 § 155(10). ¶28 The Board argues that "[i]t is clearly undisputed that the growth of vegetation is a natural condition of the property of Defendant Board."

Jackson v. Scott

72 O.B.A.J. 17 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 26, 2000

The GTCA applies to the tort claims aspects of Jackson's statutory replevin remedy and provides immunity. … The record does not clearly establish when he went to Texas and when he returned to the private facility in Oklahoma. .

Monkey Island Development Authority v. Staten

74 O.B.A.J. 2118 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 2, 2003

FACTS T4 MIDA was established with a Trust Indenture (Trust) filed with the Oklahoma Secretary of State on March 17, 1992. … Oklahoma law clearly required that the trustees of this public trust subscribe to their oath of office in order to be qualified to act.

Lounds v. State Ex Rel. Department of Veterans Affairs

255 P.3d 460 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 25, 2011

Y22 Moreover, Kermanshahi was clearly qualified to give his opinion. Under 12 0.8. … Whether or not he was familiar with federal regulations concerning veterans' nursing homes, he was clearly qualified to testify as to the appropriate methods of diagnosing, monitoring, treating, and providing daily care to

BENSHOOF v. NILES

380 P.3d 902 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 19, 2016

Mid-Century Insurance Company, 2006 OK 100 , 151 P.3d 132 , the Oklahoma Supreme Court clearly articulated this standard: Motions to dismiss are generally viewed with disfavor. … If relief is possible under any set of facts which can be established and is consistent with the allegations, a motion to dismiss should be denied.

Tice v. Pennington

30 P.3d 1164 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · May 30, 2001

Because the GTCA is in derogation of sovereignty, it "will not be construed to divest the state of its immunities unless the intention to do so is clearly expressed." Gurley, 1989 OK 34, ¶ 6 , 770 P.2d at 576 . … Thus, section 156(B) should not be construed to include a discovery rule that clearly is not part of the statutory language and that would divest the state of its immunity. ¶ 6 Furthermore, the discovery rule as a tolling

Bank of Oklahoma, N.A. v. Briscoe

911 P.2d 311 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Feb 20, 1996

Section 179 extends immunity from “personal liability” only to the trustees and beneficiaries of the public trust itself. … Clearly, Briscoe’s right to file an independent action for TLA and RESPA violations expired one year after those violations occurred.

Cummings v. Board of County Commissioners

64 O.B.A.J. 3304 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Aug 3, 1993

As noted above, the section is part of the Oklahoma Governmental Tort Claims Act, by which the Legislature adopted the doctrine of sovereign immunity for the state and its political subdivisions, but waived immunity “to the … extent and in the manner” provided in the act. 6 The § 155 exemptions are the codification of the state’s immunity.

Allen v. Lenape Lure Co.

73 O.B.A.J. 2138 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Apr 26, 2002

Creek Nation, 1997 OK 41 , 986 P.2d 985 , 2 the panel found Claimant had failed to satisfy his burden of establishing First Nations' insurance premiums were calculated in part upon Claimant's salary. … He does not appeal the finding the Tribe is immune from suit.

BARNARD v. SUTTON

321 P.3d 999 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 21, 2013

Thus, Sutton asserts, he is immune from suit under the GTCA. ¶7 The trial court concluded that after the Employee Defendants were granted judgment, the only remaining defendants were OSU and Sutton. … Sutton was clearly an employee of OSU at the time of the accident. 51 O.S. Supp.2010 § 152(7) ("'Employee' means any person who is authorized to act in behalf of a political subdivision or the state ...").