Case law

Mooney v. Regalado

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Mar 23, 2021

This case involved alleged staff-on-inmate sexual misconduct, and the Ullery Court affirmed the denial of a defendant’s motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity. … established law.

McKissick v. Gemstar-TV Guide International, Inc.

415 F. Supp. 2d 1240 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Aug 26, 2005

In that decision, the Court noted that the exchange of one security for another qualified as a purchase or sell under the rules. Id. at 1285. … Again, in paragraph 15, the Plaintiff clearly satisfies the time and place requirement when she avers that the Defendants “[a]t a subsequent ‘client event’ held in Aspen, Colorado on or about March 4, 2000, at a dinner where

Thompson v. Cendant Corp.

130 F. Supp. 2d 1255 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Feb 5, 2001

To establish a prima facie case of discriminatory discharge under the ADA, the plaintiff must establish that she: 1) is disabled within the meaning of the ADA; 2) qualified, that is, she is still able to perform the essential … However, Thompson has not established the second element required for a prima facie case under the ADA, namely that she is a “qualified individual” with a disability because she is unable, even with reasonable accommodation

Ehrig v. United States Ex Rel. Internal Revenue Service (In Re Ehrig)

308 B.R. 542 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Mar 9, 2004

“Nothing in § 523(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code suggests that a document that does not qualify as a return under the Internal Revenue Code should nonetheless qualify as a return for purposes of bankruptcy discharge. … During the pendency of the appeal in Pierchoski, the Sixth Circuit reversed the lower courts in Hindenlang and established the rule that to qualify as a return, a filing must serve some tax purpose.

Atchison

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Jan 6, 2026

They argue “the issues of liability and damages are clearly separable” and that a lack of bifurcation “could be unfairly prejudicial 1 All citations use CM/ECF pagination. … Allio’s testimony will not help the jury “determine[e] whether the officers had probable cause or whether they are entitled to qual- ified immunity” as both are questions of law. Id. at 4.

Saldivar v. Aberdeen Dynamics, LLC

284 F. Supp. 3d 1241 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Feb 16, 2018

This temporal proximity between the complaint and the materially adverse action by Aberdeen clearly supports an inference of a causal connection. … The ADA makes it unlawful to "discriminate against a qualified individual on the basis of disability." 42 U.S.C. § 12112 (a).

Harris v. Reed

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Feb 4, 2025

The law is clearly established that a detention officer may not subjectively disregard an inmate’s obvious need for medical treatment when there is a risk of serious harm to the inmate, and Black is also not entitled to qualified … immunity from plaintiff’s § 1983 claim at this stage of the case.

Cline v. Clinical Perfusion Systems, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Oct 28, 2022

Generally, to establish a prima facie case of age discrimination, a plaintiff must show: (1) that he is within the protected age group; (2) that he suffered an adverse employment action; (3) that he was qualified for the … [Plaintiff] is clearly seeking to recover for future, unearned income.

Logan v. Andrus

457 F. Supp. 1318 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Oct 5, 1978

establish such an intent, the Court may not supply one by judicial interpretation.” … The terms of the trust in issue here were established in Section 4 of the Osage Allotment Act.

Simon v. Ford Motor Co.

165 F.R.D. 650 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Nov 22, 1995

Clearly, Magistrate Wolfe was attempting to ascertain the amount of work and expense involved in the preparation of a privilege log. … Instead, the parties reached an agreement and stipulation with regard to an alternative procedure for contesting the claims of privilege and work product immunity.

Ingle ex rel. Estate of Ingle v. Metropolitan Life Insurance

947 F. Supp. 2d 1163 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · May 23, 2013

Standard of Review As an initial matter, the Court must establish the proper standard of review for plaintiffs ERISA claim. … Of the two policy exclusions at issue, this exclusion is the most clearly applicable and is sufficient standing alone to dictate the outcome.

Parson v. Farley

352 F. Supp. 3d 1141 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Nov 2, 2018

In this case, Volokh seeks to establish independent Article III standing ( see ECF No. 58 at 4-5), and Parson has not challenged Volokh's standing. … At trial, a First Amendment right of access clearly attaches under Tenth Circuit law, see supra note 5, rendering the presumption of access even more difficult for Parson to overcome.

Stephens v. Child Support Services of Oklahoma Department of Human Services

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Apr 24, 2025

App’x 938, 940 (10th Cir. 2004) (holding that the lawsuit against OKDHS was “clearly precluded” because Congress had not abrogated, and Oklahoma had not waived, Okla- homa’s right to sovereign immunity); Richter v. … Stephens’s claims, fails to establish which claims are being asserted against which defendants, and fails to show how any defendant par- ticipated in any of the alleged violations of either Ms.

Ipock v. Manor Care of Tulsa Ok, LLC

274 F. Supp. 3d 1249 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Apr 4, 2017

.' the plaintiff has obtained a written opinion from a qualified expert that clearly identifies the plaintiff and includes the determination of the expert- that, based upon a review of the available material including; but … The law requires that plaintiff consult with a qualified expert only in cases where the testimony of an expert witness would be required to establish a “breach of the relevant standard of care,” Okla. Stat. tit.

Ward v. Fisher

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Jun 12, 2024

Fisher asserts that a stay would “defer[] recognition of her immunity from suit.” Dkt. No. 42 at 3. … It clearly would not be. II. Motions to Dismiss A.

Brown v. Eppler

788 F. Supp. 2d 1261 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Apr 19, 2011

The Roth Court explained that: To have a property interest in a benefit, a person clearly must have more than an abstract need or desire for it. He must have more than a unilateral expectation of it. … Courts look to whether state law has created an “entitlement for persons qualified to receive them” that may be terminated only “for cause” or based on other specified reasons. Memphis Light, Gas and Water Division v.

Trower v. Stonebraker-Zea Live Stock Co.

17 F. Supp. 687 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Jan 12, 1937

The amended petition clearly states that the corporation had been dissolved by operation of law prior to the arising of plaintiffs’ cause of action. … The United States Supreme Court early settled the -proposition that trustees, suing for others’ benefit, may remove suits to the federal court, if they personally qualify by their citizenship for such removal and the jurisdiction

Brown v. Ludi-Leitch

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Aug 24, 2020

The complaint does not list specific claims that Brown is asserting against Judge Ludi-Leitch, but he does more clearly identify the relief he seeks. … Neither absolute nor statutory immunity bar a claim for declaratory relief against a judicial officer, but the Brown must establish that there is an actual case or controversy supporting the entry of declaratory relief.

Savage v. State of Oklahoma, The

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Mar 15, 2024

See, e.g., Will, 491 U.S. at 67 (“We cannot conclude that § 1983 was intended to disregard the well-established immunity of a State from being sued without its consent.”); Patillo v. Larned State Hosp., 462 F. … Lansdown also asserts a qualified-immunity defense. Id. at 8-11.

Hooper v. American Strategic Insurance Corporation

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Apr 17, 2025

of the plaintiff to establish a cause of action against the non-diverse party in state court.” … Servs., LLC, 341 P.3d 75, 79 (Okla. 2014) immunizes France from the claims asserted in the petition.