Case law

Ibarra v. Lee

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Sep 30, 2025

Clark clearly states that he is speaking of training standards, content, and Deputy Lee’s compliance therewith, there will be no jury confusion. The Court will not exclude Mr. … Clark is not qualified to render expert testimony on medical issues. Specifically, Defendants challenge Mr.

World Pub. Co. v. United States

72 F. Supp. 886 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · May 16, 1947

(Clearly this is so where all the stock except qualifying shares is owned by one stockholder. Helvering v. National Grocery Co., supra; Helvering v. Chicago Stock Yards Co., supra; and see Universal Steel Co. v. … At about this time, to house its printing establishment, a five-story building was erected, known as the World Building. This was raised to nine stories in 1927.

Kunneman Properties LLC v. Marathon Oil Company

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Jan 14, 2021

The party asserting the privilege bears the burden of establishing the privileged status of the communication. Chandler, 741 P.2d at 865; Motley v. … Ocelot Oil Corp., 847 F.2d at 1464 (“The clearly erroneous standard applies to factual findings . . .

Laca v. United States

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Sep 16, 2024

The Court finds that it is not unjust to award expenses when a party participated in discovery despite any claims of immunity and that the Government has waived any objections based on that immunity. … its own sovereign immunity.

Collins v. Board of County Commissioners of Nowata County

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Jun 6, 2023

To establish a prima facie case of disability discrimination under the ADA, Mr. … Collins clearly alleges he lost his left hand in an accident as a child. [Doc. 22, p. 1, ⁋ 3]. The absence of Mr.

Wisdom Ministries, Inc. v. Garrett

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Aug 1, 2023

Further, this clause prohibits states from clearly preferring one religious denomination over another. Trump v. Hawaii, 138 S. Ct. 2392, 2417 (2018). … However, Wisdom University is not accredited by approved agency and does not qualify for either exception. Id. at 10.

Hopper v. Tulsa County

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Sep 30, 2025

immunity. … Second, the Court addresses whether Hopper alleges any plausible individual capacity claims against any defendant and, if so, whether any defendant is entitled to qualified immunity.

Haddox v. Central Freightlines, Inc.

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

Regardless, Plaintiffs argue that any testimony about this exercise should be precluded because it does not qualify as “expert” testimony and would confuse and mislead the jury. … Therefore, the Plaintiff has not established that the evidence is unfairly prejudicial or otherwise “clearly inadmissible on all potential grounds.” Mendelsohn, 587 F.Supp.2d at 1208. III.

Clarke v. Bank of Commerce

506 F. Supp. 2d 851 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Mar 30, 2007

Defendant argues that the facts fail to establish a hostile work environment claim. … Here, plaintiffs are both members of a protected class, and there is no dispute that they were qualified for their positions at the Bank.

Turner v. Metropolitan Property & Casualty Insurance Company

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · May 3, 2022

Rule 902(11) To qualify for this provision, a record must meet the requirements of Rule 803(6)(A)- (C), as shown by a certification of the custodian or another qualified … The Court does not reach whether the Recordings qualify for a hearsay exception.

Skycam, LLC v. Bennett

900 F. Supp. 2d 1264 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Sep 30, 2012

Under Oklahoma law, a party seeking to establish breach of a contract — whether express or implied — must establish the elements of the claim by the greater weight of the evidence. … Defendants’ evidence and argument focus on the absence of an express agreement between the Skycam and Bennett, and clearly, no express agreement existed.

Hayes v. Owen

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Mar 30, 2023

immunity. … immunity at this stage of the litigation.

Avington v. Independent School District No. 1 of Tulsa County

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · May 1, 2025

The Act broadly defines the phrase “discriminate against a qualified individual on the basis of disability” to include “excluding or otherwise denying equal jobs or benefits to a qualified individual because of the known … Even liberally construed, the text of Avington’s EEOC charge does not clearly set forth the basis of a disability-related association discrimination claim.

Henderson v. Whirlpool Corp.

17 F. Supp. 2d 1238 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Aug 13, 1998

In order for an “eligible employee” to establish liability by an “employer,” as both terms are defined by the FMLA, 29 U.S.C. § 2611 (2) & (4), the employee must establish (1) entitlement to leave as defined by 29 U.S.C. … The liability clearly does not extend to mere insults, indignities, threats, annoyances, petty oppressions, or other trivialities. Breeden v.

JM v. Herald Elementary School

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Sep 30, 2025

STAT. tit. 51 §§ 151–172, immunizes them against Mills’s negligence claim. … The liability clearly does not extend to mere insults, indignities, threats, annoyances, petty oppressions, or other trivialities.

Emrit v. Jules

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Jul 11, 2023

Chao, 296 F.3d 952, 955 (10th Cir. 2002) (“The burden of establishing subject-matter jurisdiction is on the party asserting jurisdiction”). … Plaintiff states “this proceeding involves a discussion of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Equal Protection Clause, Due Process Clause, Fourth Amendment, and Privileges and Immunities

Fath v. Drive Clean Management, LLC

121 F. Supp. 3d 1196 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Aug 5, 2015

III. ' The AJDA prohibits “discrimination] against a qualified individual on the basis of disability in regard to ... the ... discharge of employees....” 42 U.S.C. § 12112 (a). … Plaintiffs second argument is that pretext can clearly be seen in Thomas’s and Reinhofer’s ' treatment of plaintiff. Dkt. # 46, at 17.

Brown v. Dowling

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Mar 22, 2022

The OCCA also correctly identified and reasonably applied clearly established federal law when it reasoned that Brown could not establish constitutional error, under the Sixth Amendment, absent a showing that R.D. was actually … Here, though, after citing Logan, and thus identifying the clearly established federal law governing Brown’s claim, the OCCA failed to apply that clearly established federal law in an objectively reasonable manner for two

Warford

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Aug 4, 2026

Wells clearly establishes that the substantial certainty standard remains a narrow exception to the exclusivity of the workers’ compensation remedy. … This may be established by act or omission on the part of the employer, but the employer must have the “desire to cause the consequences of his act that the actor 2 Plaintiffs’ response to the motion to dismiss includes

Cole v. Asarco Inc.

256 F.R.D. 690 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Apr 2, 2009

Bauman, Sam Freeman and Robert Walker — assert claims that are clearly atypical. … In order to establish adequacy, plaintiffs must show both that proposed class counsel is qualified and that the individual plaintiffs’ claims are “sufficiently interrelated to and not antagonistic with the class’s claims