Case law

Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Miles

69 Okla. 138 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 5, 1918

If a party was limited to expert testimony, where it is necessary for him to prove the speed of an automobile or train in order to establish negligence, it would be very rare instances where he would be able to establish … Therefore the rule that nonexpert witnesses may testify concerning the speed of an automobile and train seems to be clearly founded on sound principle and justice.

Kelley v. Garfield County Bldg. & Loan Ass'n

180 Okla. 253 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 15, 1936

and is for a special purpose; that purpose was to supply a special form of loan, presumptively, at least, to assist the citizen of small means to acquire a home and pay for it by small monthly installments, when he could qualify … This rule and these holdings appear to be the general and established rule regardless of, rather without the aid of, any statutory provision.

Lemke v. State

56 Okla. Crim. 1 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Apr 16, 1934

This, in connection with the fact that after the application was denied defendant announced ready for trial, shows clearly there was no abuse of discretion. … Under this assignment, complaint is also made that the court erred in permitting the witness Steinberg, qualified as a nonexpert, to testify in his opinion defendant was sane.

Nunley v. State

601 P.2d 459 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 9, 1979

Roy Black further testified that at the time he “agreed to work for the Sheriff’s Department” he had been granted immunity from prosecution. … Further, the evidence was clearly insufficient for the trial court to rule as a matter of law that the witness was a feigned accomplice.

In Re Driggs

325 P.2d 72 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 29, 1958

Therein, the petitioner refused to answer questions tending to establish the guilt of another. … To be valid the statute must afford absolute immunity against future prosecution for the offense to which the question relates.” [ 2 Okl.Cr. 110 , 100 P. 40 .]

Question Submitted by: Vicki Zemp Behenna, Office of the District Attorney, 7th District

2024 OK AG 15 · Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Oct 30, 2024

Clearly, the Legislature has expressed its intent that officers using excessive force and the officers who shield them from accountability act contrary to public policy. ¶13 The Legislature did not repeal section 34.1. … If immunized from criminal prosecution, the only barriers to dissuade the bad apples among the peace officer ranks are potential employment consequences and federal 1983 lawsuits. See 42 U.S.C. § 1983 .

Dolese Bros. Co. v. State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Tax Commission

74 O.B.A.J. 420 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 21, 2003

Taxpayers physically reproduce this rubber-stamped certification in their brief, but their argument is clearly ivithout record support. … used by persons in the operation of manufacturing plants already established in Oklahoma.

Sutherlin v. Independent School District No. 40

960 F. Supp. 2d 1254 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · May 13, 2013

Similarly, to establish such a claim under the ADA, plaintiffs must show “(1) he is a qualified individual with a disability, (2) who was excluded from participation in or denied the benefits of a public entity’s services … In Oklahoma, “[governmental immunity of a subdivision of the State is waived only to the extent and in the manner provided in the GTCA.” Teeter v. City of Edmond, 85 P.3d 817, 820 (Okla.2004).

St. Louis-S. F. R. Co. v. Howard

171 Okla. 561 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 16, 1935

Hill was appointed and qualified as successor to Judge Jones and it was stipulated that' a transcript of the record be furnished to Judge Hill, and that he decide the motion as successor to Judge Jones. … It is certainly and clearly evident that the trial court did not approve of the verdict of the jury for he thought the undisputed evidence entitled the plaintiff to recover.

Armstrong v. State

53 Okla. Crim. 53 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 17, 1931

It has been uniformly held that, where instruments bear marks or numbers which require explanation, one qualified to do so may explain the apparent meaning of such marks or notations. … “It is clearly admissible to' establish a usage or custom by witnesses who are experienced in the transactions involved and can testify to the facts constituting the usage and custom.” 27 E. C. L. § 43, p. 198.

Davuluri v. State ex rel. Oklahoma Board of Medical Licensure & Supervision

71 O.B.A.J. 1594 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 13, 2000

The action of the Board in Naifeh clearly was a "disciplinary action" of the Board. … Davuluri's qualifications to practice medicine in Oklahoma are not established by Dr.

State v. Bezdicek

73 O.B.A.J. 2122 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 15, 2002

If statutes were construed strictly and in conformity with what they actually say, Legislative intent could be more easily established and perplexity and confusion in the law eliminated. 394 P.2d at 543-544 . ¶ 9 In the majority … electors of a county; establishing numerical signature requirements for the sufficiency of such petitions; allowing the Attorney General to convene and conduct grand juries, upon the filing of a verified application to investigate

Pipkin v. City of Moore

735 F. Supp. 1004 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Apr 16, 1990

Swanagon, has filed his Motion for Summary Judgment on the issue of his qualified immunity. … Swanagon’s Motion for Summary Judgment on the issue of qualified immunity will be deemed moot. These determinations are made for the reasons set forth infra. The plaintiff, William A.

Opinion No. 72-206 (1972) Ag

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Aug 3, 1972

The Arkansas Supreme Court has considered the question of whether the heirs of a deceased high school instructor could qualify for State Workmen's Compensation benefits. … Title 70 O.S. 4401 -4418 [70-4401-4418] clearly emphasize the local control by governing boards of counties, cities, towns and school districts in the establishment of community junior colleges.

Travelers Insurance Co. v. L v. French Truck Service, Inc.

770 P.2d 551 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 28, 1989

In the present case, even though it is established that the owner and/or operator of the electrical line did not maintain its line at the legal height at the time of Mr. … Kelly, Okl., 389 P.2d 641, 642 [1964] (syllabi 1 and 2). [17] Once the intent of the legislature clearly appears after considering the total enactment, language may be altered and new words supplied to give it that meaning

Okla. Pub. Emps. Ass'n v. State ex rel. Okla. Tourism & Recreation Dep't

433 P.3d 353 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 20, 2018

This is the Lake Murray Lodge Statute (LMLS). ¶26 Clearly, the Legislature intended to offer severance packages to all, i.e ., classified and unclassified employees of the OTRD. … We agree. ¶36 The trial court's ruling is erroneous because the LMLS clearly applies only to "any state lodge or park facility owned by the Department."

Skillings v. Crowder

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Jul 28, 2021

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials are shielded from liability unless the federally protected right was “clearly established” at the time the right was violated. Tolan v. … Skillings’s clearly established right not to be arrested except on probable cause that she had committed a crime, they are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Caton v. Brubaker

113 Okla. 1 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 31, 1925

the defendant in error, and it is a well-settled rule of law of this state that where there is conflicting evidence on any fact, the finding of fact of the lower court must be considered the finding of fact in this court, qualified … Hence the converse is true; if not clearly against the weight of the evidence, the judgment should be sustained.

Gibson v. Copeland

71 O.B.A.J. 2951 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 26, 2000

incarceration. 113 Hence, the case presents a claim for replevin by an incarcerated individual which then raises two questions: (1) Does Oklahoma statutory replevin fall within the seope of the GTCA; and, (2) If so, does the GTCA establish … Id. at 288. $15 The GTCA applies to the tort claims aspects of Gibson's statutory replevin remedy and provides immunity.

Nipp v. State

374 P.2d 624 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 18, 1962

The appointment was an unqualified appointment to represent the accused and is clearly distinguishable from the appointment made by the court in Powell v. … Nor is the appointment qualified as was the appointment in Dumas v.