Case law

Barnes

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Mar 2, 2026

Barnes “might qualify” for those No. 25-cv-117 benefits. … Signing termination notices is clearly within the scope of Mr.

Meadows v. Century Healthcare, Inc.

445 F. Supp. 2d 1297 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Jul 27, 2006

This provision clearly distinguishes between Dr. … Du-briwny is covered because he qualifies as a hospital administrator under the St. Paul policy.

Manna v. Phillips 66 Co.

304 F. Supp. 3d 1064 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Jan 17, 2018

However, by failing to address the causation element, Plaintiff has failed to establish a prima facie claim of discrimination. … The First Amended Complaint does not clearly assert such a claim; however, because both parties have addressed an FMLA interference claim, for the purpose of summary judgment the Court will assume that this claim was pleaded

McClellan v. Board of County Commissioners

261 F.R.D. 595 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Oct 2, 2009

Such a clause would have clearly indicated that juvenile bureaus have capacity to sue and be sued. See, e.g., Okla. … In addition, Oklahoma law does not clearly designate a “chief executive officer” of a juvenile bureau.

Channing v. Seneca-Cayuga Nation

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Sep 24, 2024

Crow argued that, because these previously recognized tribal members “do not qualify to be members” of the Nation, “they do not qualify to vote” in the Secretarial election. (Id.) … When addressing sovereign immunity, however, Plaintiffs’ standing is neither here nor there.

Hindman v. Thompson

557 F. Supp. 2d 1293 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Mar 4, 2008

The Tenth Circuit has noted that what constitutes a hostile work environment in the context of section 1983 is not clearly established in this circuit. See Mitchell v. … The State fails to clearly distinguish these two claims in its briefing before the Court. 10 .

Barnett v. Regalado

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Jun 23, 2025

Qualified immunity The TCSO defendants contend they are entitled to qualified immunity. Dkt. # 81, at 21- 22. … Because Barnett fails to state a valid claim against any of the TCSO defendants, in their individual capacities, the Court will not address the issue of qualified immunity. XI.

CCF, Inc. v. First National Bank & Trust Co. of Okmulgee (In Re Slamans)

175 B.R. 762 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · May 19, 1994

If FNB does qualify, the second question is whether Section 509 subrogation should be invoked. In this case, both questions are answered affirmatively. A. Does FNB Qualify For Subrogation Under 11 U.S.C. § 509 ? … Therefore, an issuer of a letter of credit is clearly liable with, or in addition to, the debtor on a claim.

Elliott v. American Airlines, Inc.

540 F. Supp. 2d 1203 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Feb 11, 2008

The undisputed factual record clearly establishes that there exists no causal connection between Elliot’s firing and her exercising of her rights under the FMLA. … Therefore, Elliott has not established that her termination was related to the exercise or attempted exercise of her FMLA rights. Without that causal connection, Elliott’s firing cannot qualify as interference.

Gillespie v. Dentsply Sirona, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Oct 10, 2025

Gillespie acknowledges that “the underlying facts of Ho and the case at bar are clearly distinguishable.” [ECF No. 17 at 17]. … Sovereign immunity Gillespie also relies on sovereign immunity under 51 O.S. § 152.1 to support her Burk tort claim. [ECF No. 17 at 17–18].

Linn v. Developmental Services of Tulsa, Inc.

891 F. Supp. 574 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · May 11, 1995

An employer who asserts he is exempt from the Act maintains the burden of establishing “affirmatively and clearly” that the exemption applies. Lamon v. … As the Tenth Circuit has stated: An employer who asserts he is exempt from the Act has the burden of “establishing the exemption affirmatively and clearly.”

Raymond v. (1) Select Specialty Hosp. Tulsa/Midtown, LLC

375 F. Supp. 3d 1203 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Mar 20, 2019

During the investigation, Goetz spoke to Sutherland, who clearly denied sleeping. (Doc. 28-3, pg. 7.) Goetz also reinterviewed Tiemens, who then said she was not 100% sure that Sutherland was sleeping. … Prima Facie Case Plaintiff has met her burden of establishing a prima facie case.

Zachary v. Rescare Oklahoma, Inc.

471 F. Supp. 2d 1183 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Dec 20, 2006

This statement, whatever it means, does not establish a genuine issue of material fact. … Prior Stipulation and Law of the Case Clearly, this is a new theory being asserted by Plaintiffs as grounds for judgment on Defendants’ affirmative defense.

Young v. Glanz

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Sep 30, 2020

Qualified Immunity Sheriff Glanz, who is sued in his individual capacity, asserts that he is entitled to qualified immunity on plaintiff’s § 1983 claim. … Glanz would be entitled to qualified immunity on plaintiff’s § 1983 claim here, as there is no evidence that Glanz possessed a “particularized mental state with respect to” any substantial risk that Ms.

Bruce v. Globe Indemnity Co.

9 F. Supp. 761 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Jan 30, 1935

It is established by the pleadings and stipulation on file, that C. L. … It clearly follows that if the principal in the bond, the executor, is liable for illegal and improper expenditures of such funds, his surety should likewise be liable.

Fitzgerald v. Caldera

34 F. Supp. 2d 1299 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Jan 20, 1999

The words “knowingly” and/or “intentionally” are clearly absent. … Plaintiff Was Not Otherwise Qualified Apart From His Disability Even if plaintiff could show he was a disabled person under the Act at the time of his proposed removal, to establish the second element of a prima facie case

Bolin v. Oklahoma Conference of the United Methodist Church

397 F. Supp. 2d 1293 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Oct 21, 2005

Plaintiff cites to the temporal proximity between her OHRC complaint and termination to establish causation. … Regardless, Moss clearly displayed and conveyed to the Bishop his knowledge of plaintiffs interest in filing with the EEOC in his May 2002 email to the Bishop. Dkt. # 38, Ex. I, Email from Defendant Rev.

Cardtoons, L.C. v. Major League Baseball Players Ass'n

199 F.R.D. 677 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Mar 15, 2001

Aull’s claim does not establish an at issue waiver as to this advice. … The Supreme Court has not yet decided whether opinion work product is absolutely immune from discovery. Cf. Upjohn Co. v.

Campbell v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

272 F. Supp. 2d 1276 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Jul 21, 2003

The Steele Court found it unnecessary to decide the viability of a hostile work environment claim under the ADA because the plaintiff failed to establish that he was a qualified individual with a disability under the ADA. … The facts surrounding the incident for which Plaintiff was fired are clearly disputed by the parties.

Wirtz v. Regalado

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Mar 2, 2020

A claim is 5 Wirtz does not clearly tie his common-law tort claims to any specific counts identified in the complaint. … Alternatively, Regalado asserts that he has qualified immunity for any individual-capacity claims Wirtz asserts against him because Wirtz does not plausibly allege that Regalado violated his constitutional rights.