Case law

RC v. Independent School District No. 2 of Osage County, Oklahoma

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Nov 18, 2024

On July 29, 2024, the Court denied in part and granted in part Madison’s motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity. ECF No. 26.2 Madison filed an interlocutory appeal, and the Court stayed the proceeding. … However, there is an exception when federal law does not expressly establish a rule of decision.

Reeves

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Aug 26, 2026

Defendants ask the Court to dismiss plaintiff’ s claims for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, and Monroe and Najera also argue that they have qualified immunity from plaintiff's claims. … The allegations necessary to establish a § 1983 violation “will vary based on the constitutional provision at issue.” Ashcroft, 556 U.S. at 676.

Easiley v. Norris

107 F. Supp. 2d 1332 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Aug 9, 2000

Absent such a judicial determination, a defendant cannot establish that it has prevailed on the merits of the case. Hughes, 872 F.Supp. at 887 . … Having failed to obtain a judicial determination on the merits, Defendant does not qualify as a prevailing party under either 42 U.S.C. § 1988 (b) or § 2000e-5(k).

Cummings v. Minnesota Life Insurance

711 F. Supp. 2d 1287 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · May 3, 2010

. # 21, 22], Plaintiff, as beneficiary, alleges he was improperly denied accidental death benefits under a qualified employee benefit plan sponsored by defendant. … “[A]n ERISA provider is required to clearly delineate the scope of its obligations.” Id. at *1293 1319.

Above it All Roofing & Constr., Inc. v. Sec. Nat'l Ins. Co.

285 F. Supp. 3d 1224 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Jan 5, 2018

The parties do not cite, nor has the court identified, any case determining whether "asbestos" qualifies as "pollutant" under Oklahoma law. … The alleged "property damage" to O'Keefe's merchandise clearly did not arise from the "inhal[ation]" or "ingesti[on]" of asbestos.

Sloan v. Mud Products, Inc.

114 F. Supp. 916 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Aug 11, 1953

established by the letter agreement of October 5. 1948, which was entered into after Sloan became ill and was unable to supervise the manufacture of the valves. … Quite clearly discovery is something less than invention. Invention requires genius, imagination, inspiration, or whatever is the faculty that gives birth to the inventive concept.

Gille v. United States

838 F. Supp. 521 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Aug 31, 1993

The specific issue is whether the information disclosed on the postal tracer forms qualifies as “return information” for purposes of the liability imposed by sections 7431 and 6103 of Title 26 of the United States Code. … At the same time, Congress clearly did not intend to impede the ability of the IRS to collect tax liabilities.

Mengert v. U.S. Transportation Security Administration

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

Congress established the exhaustion prerequisite in order to limit unnecessary litigation. See McNeil v. … A copy of the complaint did not qualify, the agency said, “so we are unable to deem it presented at this time.” (Id.). On June 29, Ms.

In Re Williams Securities Litigation

496 F. Supp. 2d 1195 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Jul 6, 2007

Mintzer clearly does not pick up where Mr. Mathis left off — and, as has been noted, Mr. … Plaintiffs contend that the evidence establishes the existence of factors clearly indicating that substantial doubt existed about WCG’s ability to con *1288 tinue as a going concern as of December 31, 2000. - These factors

Smith v. Basin Park Hotel, Inc.

178 F. Supp. 2d 1225 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Dec 27, 2001

Thus, neither the NATA brochure 7 nor the ESCC or Travel-ocity websites create contacts by Defendant which qualify for consideration under the minimum contacts test used to evaluate personal jurisdiction. … At one end of the spectrum are situations where a defendant clearly does business over the Internet.

Cato v. Hargrove

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · May 27, 2020

Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), bars plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment claims, (3) defendants are entitled to qualified immunity, and (4) the facts alleged do not support a claim for punitive damages. … immunity or their argument that plaintiff fails to state a claim for punitive damages.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Unit Drilling Co.

4 F. Supp. 3d 1257 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Nov 1, 2013

The statute “establishes a comprehensive administrative procedure whereby the parties involved, including the EEOC, have the fullest opportunity to resolve charges of discrimination without resorting to the courts.” … Clearly, the threat of a national class action is a greater incentive to conciliate....”).

Shelton v. Regalado

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Oct 4, 2023

A claim is plausible if the facts alleged “raise a reasonable expectation that discovery will reveal evidence” of the conduct necessary to establish plaintiff’s claim. Id. at 556; see also Ashcroft v. … While Shelton’s factual allegations in support of claim two are not well developed, he clearly asserts a “constitutional” tort arising from the operational act of providing food to a pretrial detainee housed in a county

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

838 F. Supp. 1501 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Nov 23, 1993

This clearly involves a dispute respecting the construction and effect of the First Amendment. … See also, Young, supra (“Clearly when only money is at stake, there can be no irreparable injury.”)

Fleet Business Credit, L.L.C. v. Wings Restaurants, Inc.

291 B.R. 550 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Apr 10, 2003

66 provides for the appointment of a receiver “in accordance with the practice heretofore followed in the courts of the United States.... ” Additionally, “[c]reditors with a security interest in real property have a well-established … Therefore, Huge does not qualify for the narrow exception to the general rule that the automatic stay is not extended to solvent co-defendants of the bankruptcy debtor because it has failed to demonstrate that such an “identity

Roberts

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Sep 8, 2026

An employee may establish causation by showing that the adverse employment action occurred soon after the protected activity. Annett v. … Second, plaintiff has clearly alleged that Dr.

Haddox v. Central Freightlines, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Sep 25, 2025

Moore’s testimony concerning the location of the southbound traffic is clearly in error.”  “Mr. Haddox had his headlight illuminated upon approach. … Tyson Foods, Inc., 565 F.3d 769, 780 (10th Cir. 2009) (“[W]hen experts employ established methods in their usual manner, a district court need not take issue under Daubert; however, where established methods are employed

Spruill v. Reserve Loan Life Ins.

21 F. Supp. 889 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Jan 25, 1938

Woofter and Bessie Woofter filed their answer and cross-petition to plaintiff’s petition, in which they admitted that plaintiff was the duly appointed, qualified, and acting administratrix of the estate of Amo R. … However, with respect to the motion to dismiss the defendant Fourth National Bank, it should be observed that if the facts are established as indicated by the pleadings that the policy of insurance sued on herein has been

Jefferson v. Barnhart

209 F. Supp. 2d 1200 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · May 29, 2002

The Commissioner’s decision will be reversed when he/she uses the wrong legal standard or fails to clearly demonstrate reliance on the correct legal standards. Glass, 43 F.3d at 1395 . II. DISCUSSION A. … Plaintiff did, therefore, establish that she meets the first prong of Parts A and E of Listing 112.05.

Commercial Financial Services, Inc. v. Brady (In re Commercial Financial Services, Inc.)

261 B.R. 49 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Nov 21, 2000

Ill The above-stated findings establish that Jenner & Block 7 clearly failed to meet its responsibilities under Fed. R.Civ.P. 11(b)(3). … And that qualifies as coming from Mr. Jones, doesn’t it, because counsel serves as his agent? A. I’m not going to debate the legalities with you, Mr. Seymour, I just am telling you we got it from counsel. Q.