Case law

BURGIN v. LEACH

320 P.3d 33 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jan 21, 2014

Further, the standard of care required to establish liability is not ordinary negligence but reckless disregard for the rights of others. § 11-106(E). … Whether a defendant is properly using audible signals or flashing lights are factors that determine whether the driver qualifies for the privilege. See Blackburn v.

Parks v. City of Oklahoma City

559 P.2d 1266 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jan 20, 1977

First it alleges that 11 O.S. 1971 , §§ 330.51 & 330.52 statutorily establishes that the city water department is a governmental function under the first of the above statutes and clothed with immunity from suit by the second … an intent to the language of 11 O.S.1971, § 330.51 would be to ignore the provision of Article 5, Sec. 57 of the Oklahoma Constitution stating “Every act of the Legislature shall embrace but one subject, which shall be clearly

Harmon v. DAMET

274 P.3d 810 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 4, 2011

Supp. 2007 § 2008.1, (2) failed to show he has a legal right to relief, (8) failed to establish the trial court had a legal duty to "type and prepare summonses for him," "set a case for hearing before service of summons on … Subsection E of § 2008.1 also provides for a court-mandated reply by the inmate if a defendant claims either qualified or absolute immunity in its answer. 3 117 However, there is nothing in the language of the statute itself

BARNARD v. SUTTON

2014 OK CIV APP 30 · 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 . . .").

Carlos v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.

68 O.B.A.J. 1302 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 24, 1996

of the latter argument, Defendant attached, as an exhibit to its summary judgment reply brief, *1184 a copy of an ODOT letter stating ODOT is “self-insured” for vehicle and tort liability under a risk management program established … Roberts also is distinguishable, because the injured plaintiffs claim in that case clearly exceeded the limits of the tort-feasor’s liability insurance.

OKLA. PUBLIC EMPLOYEES ASSOC. v. STATE ex rel. OKLA. TOURISM and RECREATION DEPT.

433 P.3d 353 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 20, 2018

This is the Lake Murray Lodge Statute (LMLS). ¶26 Clearly, the Legislature intended to offer severance packages to all, i.e ., classified and unclassified employees of the OTRD. … We agree. ¶36 The trial court's ruling is erroneous because the LMLS clearly applies only to "any state lodge or park facility owned by the Department."

SMITH v. HAMMOND & ASSOCIATES

358 P.3d 962 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 11, 2015

The alleged malpractice harm (loss of Smith's bankruptcy homestead exemption) and thus damage to Smith occurred when Hammond filed her bankruptey before Smith had established two-year residency in Oklahoma to qualify for … Smith could not qualify for the exemptions. an

Wilson v. Prudential Insurance Company of America

528 P.2d 1135 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 14, 1974

Plaintiffs allege in their Proposition I that “the sustaining of Defendant’s Demurrer to its Petition is clearly against the weight of authority under Oklahoma law, .” … Such a restruct-ing of the sentence would do violence to the contract language and would be in violation of established grammatical rules of construction.

MOATES v. OKLAHOMA TAX COMMISSION

473 P.3d 1088 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Aug 4, 2020

The Moates claim that the OTC's order is clearly contrary to the applicable provisions of the Sales Tax Code. … To receive an exemption card, the qualifying veteran must be an Oklahoma resident and submit to the OTC Taxpayer Assistance Division the following information: "(1) Qualifying Veteran .

Matthews v. Funck

155 P.3d 852 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jan 9, 2007

Transfer of this property occurred after January 1, 2004, the effective date on which the value was established for the 2004 tax year, and section 8B clearly required reassessment of that value as a result of Matthews's purchase … As discussed, there is no logical reason why a qualifying senior who purchases property on March 15 should be entitled to the freeze while a qualifying senior who purchases on March 16 would not.

Cooper v. Millwood Independent School District No. 37

66 O.B.A.J. 18 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Aug 2, 1994

Courts do not read immunity into the exemption provisions if they are silent, doubtful or ambiguous as applied to any particular circumstances. Gunn v. Consolidated Rural Water & Sewer, 839 P.2d 1345 (Okla.1992). … Cooper’s Petition clearly links Neal’s legal duties, and the alleged breach of those *1375 duties, to Neal’s operation of Millwood’s bus.

Expungement of the Record of Holder v. State

219 P.3d 562 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 3, 2008

Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigations (OSBI) objected to each motion, asserting Holder did not qualify for expungement under Oklahoma law because he had been convicted of more than one (1) offense. … It is clearly intended to aid those who are acquitted, exonerated, or who otherwise deserve a second chance at a 'clean record."" McMahon, 1998 OK CIV APP 103, at ¶ 9 , 959 P.2d at 609 .

Fuller v. Board of Education

65 O.B.A.J. 2099 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 1, 1994

Although the court did not specify which six voters were not qualified to vote or which four voters it found had questionable qualifications, it is clear that the fact determination is not clearly against the weight of the … This witness was qualified to vote in the election. II.

Chrysler Credit Corp. v. Ferguson Pontiac-GMC, Inc.

64 O.B.A.J. 1791 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 9, 1993

Clearly, Wilkersons had a right to the eleven cars, and Chrysler’s security interest attached to that right. The question is Chrysler’s priority. … Ferguson contends the evidentiary material establishes as a matter of law that Chrysler was not in good faith when it advanced funds to Wilkersons on these eleven vehicles.

STATE v. SHADE

407 P.3d 790 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 16, 2017

Hence, 18 merely sets forth who qualifies to file a motion for expungement. … Nevertheless, a petitioner must establish that "one of the 18 circumstances is shown to exist,” and only then is "a prima facie showing of harm ... made.” Holder, ¶ 5.

Offield Ex Rel. Offield v. Park View Hosp.

73 O.B.A.J. 3086 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 12, 2002

However, the Supreme Court in Roberts also held that a hospital “operating-under only a mere trust authority,” and “not being conducted as a trust for the public benefit ... is an illusory public trust, which [does not] qualify … Oklahoma Tax Commission, 1946 OK 113, ¶ 11 , 167 P.2d 884, 888 . 9 ¶ 13 In this respect, by amended § 152(8)(d), the Legislature clearly defined “public trust” and “political subdivision” to include a municipal hospital,

Dorsey v. Dorsey

373 P.3d 1084 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Aug 25, 2016

In re J.D.H., 2006 OK 5, ¶ 14 , 130 P.3d 245 . 10 Under this test, the doctor's written medical diagnosis clearly does not qualify for the hearsay exception because it is not a statement by the patient about her physical … Since the written medical diagnosis does not qualify for the exception, it is also obvious that Wife's recitation of the diagnosis does not qualify under the exception.

Washington v. Anderson Wholesale

996 P.2d 497 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 3, 1999

This analysis is also clearly consistent with the prece-dential definition of “accidental injury” employed by the Workers’ Compensation Court. See, City of Nichols Hills v. … was “in the course of” her employment. -5.- THAT "In the term 'accidental injuries,’ the substantive 'injuries’ expresses the notion of a thing or event, that is, the wrong or damage done to the person, while 'accidental' qualifies

Scribner v. Hillcrest Medical Center

65 O.B.A.J. 164 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 15, 1992

In its fifth subproposition, Hospital alleges immunity from liability for punitive damages as a “not-for-profit,” tax exempt corporation. … We therefore reject Hospital’s claim of immunity from punitive damages.

T.L.I. ex rel. Irick v. Board of County Commissioners

376 P.3d 930 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Aug 11, 2015

Board responded with several defenses, including immunity under provisions of the Governmental Tort Claims Act, specifically citing 51 0.8. Supp. 2018, §§ 155(5) and 155(15). … He attached Board road grader employees' work and time sheets to establish that presence.