Case law

Seay v. Oklahoma Board of Dentistry

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Apr 21, 2020

judgment arguing that Plaintiffs have failed to allege a constitutional violation, that, in any case, the action is time barred, and that they are entitled to qualified immunity. … Because the Court finds Plaintiffs’ § 1983 claims are time barred, there is no need to consider Defendants’ qualified immunity argument, raised for the first time in their motion for summary judgment.

Rhoades v. Stitt

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Mar 8, 2021

Stat. tit. 47, § 2-102 does not supply Rhoades with a property interest and that even if it did, each Defendant is entitled to qualified immunity.1 Rhoades responds by arguing that the Governor does not have the … In other   1 The Court need not address the qualified immunity arguments because the Governor’s termination of a purely executive officer is not subject

Oklahoma Nursing Home Ass'n v. Demps

792 F. Supp. 721 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Feb 28, 1992

Medicaid is a cooperative federal-state program through which the federal government provides financial assistance to states, to enable states to furnish medical care to qualifying individuals. … Although the Housing Act itself made no reference to utilities, the Act’s implementing regulations of the Department of Housing and Urban Development clearly defined “rent” as including a reasonable amount for the use of

Stuckert v. Alexander

4 F. Supp. 172 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · May 3, 1933

“When the receiver was appointed and had qualified, this had the effect to put the property of the partnership in custodia legis. Texas Trunk Ry. Co. v. Lewis, 81 Tex. 8 , 16 S.W. 647 , 26 Am. St. Rep. 776 . … The system-established in Booth v.

United States v. Sanders

99 F. Supp. 113 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jul 27, 1951

upholding the tax, the Supreme Court stated: “ * * * the mere purchase of supplies or equipment for use in conducting a business which constitutes interstate commerce is not so identified with that commerce as to make the sale immune … In both of these statements, the court clearly implies that, even though the fuel is to be used in interstate commerce, the transaction between the vendor of the fuel and the operator of the air-line company is wholly of

Anderson v. Ford Motor Co.

303 F. Supp. 2d 1253 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Mar 10, 2004

. *1255 The procedure for removal is established by 28 U.S.C. § 1446 . The portion of the statute relevant to the timeliness of removal is found at § 1446(b). … If the Court were to adopt the Andersons’ interpretation of the statute, it would run counter to the principle so clearly stated in Murphy Bros.

Andrews v. Oklahoma Workers Compensation Commission

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Oct 7, 2021

Sovereign immunity encompasses two separate but related concepts: immunity from suit and immunity from liability. Trant, 754 F.3d at 1172. … Jan. 22, 2014) (“When a plaintiff fails to establish a prima facie claim under the ADEA, he fails to establish a claim of age discrimination under the OADA.”) (citation omitted).

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Ackerman, Hood & McQueen, Inc.

758 F. Supp. 1440 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Feb 20, 1991

Establishment of a Prima Facie Case of Discrimination 1. … The EEOC has established the second element of the prima facie case by showing objective evidence that Torbeck was qualified for, and was performing, her job.

Dowell v. School Board of Oklahoma City Public Schools

219 F. Supp. 427 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jul 11, 1963

in equity authorized by law, Title 42 United States Code Section 1983 , and is being brought to redress the deprivation under color of law, statutes, regulations, customs and usages of a state of rights, privileges and immunities … Dowell, Plaintiff’s Exhibit 14 clearly shows that her patron application for transfer from District No.

Kimbro v. Oklahoma House of Representatives

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jan 16, 2025

immunity,15 and states are not “persons” under § 1983.16 Further, Oklahoma has not waived its sovereign immunity for § 1983 claims.17 As such, even if Kimbro were granted leave to amend her complaint to laws,’ provides … Kimbro offers no evidence of any written policy establishing that this is the normal procedure in such situations.

Waldon v. Maughn

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Mar 22, 2023

“In applying this test, some courts have adopted the requirements for establishing a conspiracy under Section 1983.” Id. at 1454. … App’x 725, 727–28 (10th Cir. 2008) (unpublished) (concluding that a judge’s imposition of bail clearly implicated an action taken in the judge’s judicial capacity, and as such, the judge was absolutely immune from the

Hamlin v. Becerra

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · May 9, 2024

Plaintiff fails to establish that the Court has subject-matter jurisdiction. A. … Leatherman, 460 F.2d 507, 514 (10th Cir. 1972) (“A federal court’s jurisdiction must clearly appear from the face of a complaint or removal petition . . . .”); Tesh, 215 F.

National Railroad Passenger Corporation v. Harris

354 F. Supp. 887 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Dec 30, 1972

It has made no good faith effort to enforce this provision, its established policy having been to ignore it insofar as possible. … Article 5, § 57 of the Oklahoma Constitution provides: “Every act of the Legislature shall embrace but one subject, which shall be clearly expressed in its title * * *.

Danmola v. United States

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Apr 15, 2024

Davis, 531 U.S. 230, 232 (2001) (discussing § 3621(e)(1)’s mandate that the Bureau of Prisons (or “BOP”) “provide residential substance abuse treatment”—known as “RDAP”—to qualifying prisoners). … Petitioner’s Objection largely repeats his pleading allegations and does not challenge Judge Erwin’s characterization of the relevant standard for establishing a due process violation.

Ohio Casualty Ins. v. Callaway

45 F. Supp. 586 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jul 3, 1942

. *587 At the outset the court holds that it has jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter as diversity of citizenship clearly exists and the amount in controversy exceeds $3,000. … He felt that he was buying protection and security from one best qualified to sell it. He was lulled into a sense of security by the assurances of the insurance company’s agent.

Kopaddy v. Pottawatomie County Public Safety Center

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Mar 29, 2024

Defendant Wilson also argues that Plaintiff has not pled sufficient facts to state a claim against him in his individual capacity, or, alternatively, Defendant Wilson is entitled to qualified immunity. … immunity.

Jefferson v. Douglas

493 F. Supp. 13 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jul 12, 1979

Upon examination of the parties’ pleadings, the report of the Department of Corrections, and Plaintiff’s Response to said report, the Court finds that the record in this case contains sufficient facts to establish the frivolousness … The cancellation of Plaintiff’s canteen privileges does not constitute a deprivation of any right, privilege or immunity secured to Plaintiff by the Constitution and laws of the United States.

Wright v. Kay County Justice Facilities Authority

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jan 21, 2021

“[A] motion for summary judgment should be granted only when the moving party has established the absence of any genuine issue as to a material fact.” Mustang Fuel Corp. v. … Thus, Defendants are entitled to judgment on them.3 Because Plaintiff cannot establish a constitutional violation, it is unnecessary to address Defendant Jones’ claim of qualified immunity.

Finstuen v. Edmondson

497 F. Supp. 2d 1295 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · May 19, 2006

The Supreme Court has, on numerous occasions, clearly established these parental rights are fundamental. Troxel v. … Supreme Court jurisprudence clearly establishes a fundamental right to travel. United States v.

Edwards v. State of Oklahoma

429 F. Supp. 668 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Aug 23, 1976

Ct. of Findlay, O., 1975) the court held that the destruction of the test ampoule after th& breathalyzer test had been properly administered and analyzed by a qualified individual who was approved by the appropriate state … The results were clearly admissible under the rules of evidence established by the Oklahoma Statutes pertaining to chemical tests of alcohol influence.