Case law

Clement v. Coon

161 Okla. 216 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 6, 1932

.; that said company did not have at any time any office in the state of Oklahoma; that it had never qualified to do business in the state of Oklahoma; that neither L. R. … The affidavits filed by the defendant company are so qualified by careful and well guarded exceptions as to be of little value in determining the question at 'issue.

Coleman v. the Territory of Oklahoma

5 Okla. 201 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 12, 1897

We think that one who contests the right of entry made upon public lands, by another, and who is himself qualified to make entry thereon, and who, if successful in his contest, will have a preference right over all others … In this case the question is clearly presented whether, when the prosecution has established the commission of the offense by the accused, it was also its duty to establish by evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, its right

City of Ardmore v. Hendrix

348 P.2d 497 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 12, 1960

in a prudent *499 manner and in accordance with the law of Oklahoma, and the ordinances of the City of Ardmore; that prior to the collision he caused the headlamps to light up, a red spotlight to light and the siren to clearly … The plaintiff contends there is no evidence to establish that the defendant Wallace was on an emergency run at the time of the accident.

BURGIN v. LEACH

2014 OK CIV APP 18 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jan 21, 2014

Further, the standard of care required to establish liability is not ordinary negligence but reckless disregard for the rights of others. §11-106(E). … Whether a defendant is properly using audible signals or flashing lights are factors that determine whether the driver qualifies for the privilege. See , Blackburn v.

Leahy v. State Treasurer

173 Okla. 614 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 18, 1935

But this fact is only significant as evidencing the contrast between his qualified power of disposition of that property and his untrammeled ownership of the income in controversy. … The latter was clearly beyond the control of the United States. The duty to pay it into petitioner’s hands, and his power to use it after it was so paid, were absolute. Work v. Mosier, 261 U. S. 352 ; Work v.

Kinney v. Board of Com'rs of Tulsa County, Okl.

66 O.B.A.J. 1487 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 21, 1995

Said charter may provide for the organization, reorganization, establishment and administration of the government of the county, including the control and regulations of the performance of and the compensation for all duties … The Act permits voters in the qualifying counties to effectively replace the entire system of county government.

Coker v. Stitt

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Dec 31, 2024

These objections contend that sovereign immunity is inapplicable because Defendant Harvanek had final policy-making authority, his conduct was objectively unreasonable such that he violated a clearly established constitutional … Accordingly, despite Plaintiff's arguments regarding Defendant Harvanek’s final policy-making authority, respondeat superior liability, and violations of “clearly established” constitutional rights, Plaintiff

Wadsworth v. Neher

138 Okla. 4 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 16, 1929

We are of the opinion that the record fails to establish the allegations of fra-ud and corruption urged by plaintiffs. … City of Clinton, reported in 131 Okla. 186 , 268 Pac. 254 , the court very clearly announces the rule of law as to the necessity of showing sufficient illegal votes cast to change the result of an election, in an action to

Springer v. Richardson Law Firm

239 P.3d 473 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 25, 2010

The "litigation privilege" upon which Appellees rely "accords attorneys, parties, jurors and witnesses immunity for comments or writings made during the course of or preliminary to judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings." … Exhibit 10 of Appellant's May 2, 2008 Petition establishes that each of Appellant's thirteen "Counts" are direct quotes from the April 22, 2008 Petition's "Facts Pertaining to All Claims" and each alleges Appellees "made

Cooper v. MILLWOOD INDEPENDENT SCH. DIST.

887 P.2d 1370 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Aug 2, 1994

Courts do not read immunity into the exemption provisions if they are silent, doubtful or ambiguous as applied to any particular circumstances. Gunn v. Consolidated Rural Water & Sewer, 839 P.2d 1345 (Okla. 1992). … Cooper's Petition clearly links Neal's legal duties, and the alleged breach of those *1375 duties to Neal's operation of Millwood's bus.

Atwater v. Hassett

27 Okla. 292 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 26, 1910

provisions of the state Constitution, said provision appears to harmonize and to have been adopted in all respects in accordance therewith. 2. “* * * No state shall make, or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities … the court said, speaking of the negro race: ‘By reason of its previous condition of servitude and dependence, this race had acquired or accentuated certain peculiarities of habit, of temperament, and of character, which clearly

Independent Consol. School Dist. No. 7 v. Bowen

199 Okla. 92 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 1, 1947

Plaintiff first asserts that: “The power of the Legislature to establish and maintain a public school system, vested in it by Section 1, Article XIII, of the Constitution, must be construed with, and is restricted by, the … Sections 7(a) and 8 clearly authorize and impose upon the annexing district the responsibility of administering the affairs and budget of the annexed district during the balance of the fiscal year within which annexation

Belletini v. State ex rel. Department of Transportation

67 O.B.A.J. 2520 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 29, 1996

Herein, ODOT asserts (1) immunity from liability under the Oklahoma Governmental Tort Claims Act (OGTCA), 51 O.S. § 151 et seq., (2) failure of Appellees’ proof of all elements of actionable negligence, and (3) excessive … Moreover, the lay testimony adduced clearly established, in our view at least some of Bovio’s declining medical condition to the injuries sustained in the auto accident, and we hold the trial court did not err in admitting

Opinion No. (1985)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jun 17, 1985

Clearly, such loans are not direct obligations of the United States. Are they, then, obligations whose principal and interest are guaranteed by the United States? … Lenders holding GSLP student loans that are in default are paid in full by a guarantee agency, which may be either a state agency or non-profit corporation meeting the qualifications established by the Secretary. Id .

Brown Bros. v. Parks

176 Okla. 615 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 17, 1936

Respondent’s physician, however, testified that in his opinion the condition of the respondent was attributable to the original injury which respondent had sustained, but qualified this testimony by saying that either the … Since the record herein fails to disclose any further or additional facts to those disclosed in the former proceedings before the commission and on review in this com”', but on the contrary clearly discloses a lack of jurisdiction

State v. Thomason

538 P.2d 1080 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 18, 1975

. ****** “The history of the privilege . . . especially the spirit of the struggle by which its establishment came about — suggests that the privilege is limited to testimonial disclosures. … The history of the constitutional provision referred to clearly demonstrates that it was not intended to reach a case like this. . . .

Bond v. State

9 Okla. Crim. 696 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Feb 1, 1913

Some of it was only remotely connected with the chargé under investigation, but we. cannot say it did not tend to .establish a conspiracy to corrupt the officers of Pottawatomie county, and thereby secure immunity from prosecutions … The jury was positively instructed to disregard the statements made by the court, and the different duties of the court and jury were clearly stated.

Rohde v. University of Central Oklahoma Board of Regents

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Sep 30, 2021

Nor do Defendants contest that Plaintiff was qualified to receive the benefits and services provided by UCO as required to establish a claim for violation of the ADA or the Rehabilitation Act. … also would be entitled to dismissal based on qualified immunity.

Hamilton v. Oklahoma Department of Human Services

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Sep 3, 2025

Here, Strain and Shropshire move to dismiss on the basis of the affirmative defense of qualified immunity, which creates a presumption that the defendant is immune from suit. Truman v. … To overcome that presumption, “the plaintiff must show (1) the defendant’s actions violated a constitutional or statutory right, and (2) that right was clearly established at the time of the defendant’s complained-of

Opinion No. (1986)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Feb 27, 1986

The SIC was developed for use in the classification of establishments by type of activity in which they are engaged. … Clearly, the language of this constitutional provision permits expansions of existing facilities to avail themselves of the tax exemption provision.