Case law

Fisk

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · May 4, 2026

Eleventh Amendment Immunity. … its intent to abrogate immunity.”

State v. Frazier

76 O.B.A.J. 1714 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 28, 2005

. ¶ 11 On cross-examination, W.V. acknowledged she was not a qualified forensic interviewer. … Further, the voices on the recording are not clearly identified. ¶40 Last, the substitute, and supposedly qualified, interviewer was not present at trial and available for cross-examination.

Opinion No. (1995)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Dec 1, 1995

Therefore its ordinary meaning is applicable. 25 O.S. 1991 , § 1[ 25-1 ]. ¶ 11 The dictionary definition of "relate" is "to show or establish a logical or causal connection between . . . [to] have reference." … To purchase any insurance deemed necessary for providing benefits. . . . 74 O.S.Supp. 1995, § 1365[ 74-1365 ] (A). ¶ 13 These powers clearly, by a plain reading of 74 O.S.Supp. 1995, § 1364[ 74-1364 ], relate to the purchase

Kansas, Oklahoma & Gulf Ry. Co. v. Doneghy

207 Okla. 346 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 28, 1952

“To Have and to Hold the premises hereby conveyed together with all the improvements thereon and appurtenances and immunities thereunto belonging or in any wise appertaining forever and warrant and title to the same. … The case plainly indicates that the nature of the estate in an ambiguous deed may be established by parol or extrinsic evidence. Defendant also cites Stinson v. Oklahoma Ry. Co., 190 Okla. 624 , 126 P. 2d 260 .

Opinion No. (2005)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Aug 15, 2005

The court struck down legislation directing all agencies, including the Board of Regents, to increase employee salaries, declaring that "determination of faculty salaries is clearly an integral part of the power to govern … We note the court's acknowledgment in Baker that "constitutionally assured independence cannot be equated with complete immunity for [sic] legislative regulation." Baker, 638 P.2d at 469 .

Lyons v. Fulsom

54 Okla. 84 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 14, 1915

Broaddus was the duly appointed, qualified, and acting guardian of plaintiff, a minor; that on January 25, 1908, one Louis Fulsom was duly appointed guardian of the person and estate of the plaintiff by the county court of … It is evident from the record before us that the original letters of guardianship were offered in evidence and considered by the court; and in our opinion such evidence was clearly competent to establish the appointment of

Opinion No. 80-125 (1980) Ag

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Aug 21, 1980

A plain reading of the above-mentioned provisions clearly authorizes cities and counties the ability to execute contracts and appropriate funds to establish and operate a joint city/county library. … this constitutional provision, it further follows that an agreement executed by any political subdivision must, by its own terms, not extend beyond the current fiscal year absent an affirmative vote of three-fifths of the qualified

United States v. Haskell

169 F. 449 · District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Apr 10, 1909

If so, but few indictments would be immune to attack. … It is not to be expected that any grand juror after the lapse of several months would be able to accurately repeat the propositions of law so stated with all of their qualifying phrases.

South v. Wilkinson

576 P.2d 1173 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 28, 1978

Except for Town of Wellston, supra, each cited case was decided prior to amendment of § 3(4) which qualified status of partners as employees, (Laws, 1959) Ch. la, p. 397, by inclusion of language above quoted. … The statute clearly was not intended to permit such a result.

City of Oklahoma City v. Johnson

294 P.3d 470 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 30, 2012

Respondent argues the decision of the lower court is so clearly contrary to the weight of the evidence as to require its vacation by this Court. 17 The law in effect at the time of the injury controls determination of a claim … The award for 355 weeks of benefits lies within the range of disability established by the medical evidence.

Lewis v. State Ex Rel. Martin

179 Okla. 465 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 23, 1937

The officers above designated shall serve for a period of two years and until their successors are elected and qualified. … “The court has further held that where two statutes cover in who’e or in part the same matter and 'are not absolutely irreconcilable, the duty of the court — no purpose to repeal being clearly expressed or indicated —is,

Carl v. Board of Regents of University of Oklahoma

577 P.2d 912 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 11, 1978

In the alternative, appellee contends that if it is determined that the Admissions Board is subject to such law, the law is discriminatory, denies equal protection of the laws and constitutes a clearly unwarranted governmental … This is because it has no rights, privileges and immunities pro-tectable under the Federal or State Constitutions. Substantive due process and equal protection guarantees run to “persons”, not the state.

Powers v. Alaska Commission on Post-Secondary Education (In Re Powers)

301 B.R. 90 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Sep 30, 2003

Section 106(a) clearly meets the “unequivocal intent to abrogate” test. Straight v. Wyoming Dep’t. of Transp. (In re Straight), 248 B.R. 403 (10th Cir. BAP 2000). … This Clause, located in Article I, grants Congress the power to “establish ... uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States.” U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 4.

Question Submitted by: The Honorable Mike Osburn, Oklahoma House of Representatives, District 81

2024 OK AG 12 · Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Aug 21, 2024

A legislative act is presumed to be constitutional and will be upheld "unless it is clearly, palpably and plainly inconsistent with fundamental law." Taylor v. State and Educ. Employees Group Ins. … Garner, Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts 147 (2012) (Series-Qualifier Canon).

McClain v. Southwest Steel Co., Inc.

940 F. Supp. 295 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Jun 25, 1996

The liability clearly does not extend to mere insults, indignities, threats, annoyances, petty oppressions, or other trivialities.” Breeden v. … As a threshold issue, for Plaintiff to make a prima facie case of harassment under the ADA, the Plaintiff must be a qualified individual with a disability.

Ridgeway v. State

553 P.2d 511 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Aug 2, 1976

This assertion is not warranted from this authority cited and is clearly erroneous. … The term ‘patently’ means clearly and obviously.

Keating v. Edmondson

72 O.B.A.J. 3672 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 4, 2001

DAY TIME FRAME ESTABLISHED BY THE STATUTE, FROM ALTERING THE CABINET SYSTEM. … Clearly, the Legislature intended to impose restrictions on the state's executive in the formation of a cabinet system.

Lutnes

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · May 4, 2026

For instance, state prosecutors enjoy absolute immunity against “§ 1983 [actions] for activities intimately associated with the judicial process.”33 State judges are likewise absolutely immune from such actions.34 Qualified … immunity, too, applies when a plaintiff demonstrates a defendant violated one of the plaintiff’s constitutional rights and that right was “clearly established” when the violation allegedly occurred such that all reasonable

Harding v. Grisham

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Oct 13, 2022

In establishing the defense of qualified immunity, the Supreme Court has attempted to balance the protection of civil rights and "the need to protect officials who are required to exercise their discretion and the related … Individual government actors retain their immunity unless the plaintiff can show that they violated "clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known." Id.

Beck v. Day

178 Okla. 310 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 6, 1936

So here the fact that defendants had been placed in possession of the certificate was clearly established, and that they had not parted with such possession likewise is clearly established. … That court had the whole picture before it and was better qualified to pass on the question, and having' done so, by denial of the motion for new trial, we accept its decision and judgment.”