Case law

Lantz v. Hermanson

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Nov 27, 2019

Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994), the applicable two-year statute of limitations, the lack of personal participation in the alleged constitutional violations and qualified immunity. … The court does not base this upon the application of prosecutorial immunity or even the application of qualified immunity.

Grison Oil Corp. v. Corporation Commission

186 Okla. 548 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 13, 1940

For if the opinion of a qualified expert is, in the absence of detail justifying the opinion, of sufficient probative force to support a decision, the mere omission of supporting details cannot be said to render the evidence … A witness qualified to express an opinion as an expert may do so either upon facts propounded to him in the form of a hypothetical question or from his own observation and knowledge of a given situation.

State Ex Rel. West v. Farmers' Nat. Bank of Cushing

47 Okla. 667 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 22, 1915

Ed. 841 , it was said: ‘The second defense set up in the answer, as we have seen, is that the defendant below became a national bank under the authority of the act of Congress of 1864, * * * and thereby acquired immunity … The court found that the plaintiff in error (defendant below) did become a national bank doing a banking business under the laws of the United States, but decided that it did not thereby acquire an immunity from liability

Pierce v. State

371 P.2d 924 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 29, 1961

It was contended he was not qualified by admission to practice medicine in Oklahoma. That is not an essential to testimonial expertness. In Bingham v. … It is clearly apparent that this matter had already been covered in the state’s case in chief. The two cases relied on by defendant in this regard lay down the rule as follows : Corliss v.

McGill v. Ballard

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Oct 7, 2025

McGill are true, the doctrines of absolute and qualified immunity bar Mr. McGill’s claims. The doctrine of prosecutorial immunity operates as a complete bar to claims for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. … No. 23-cv-365 prosecutor lacked sufficient evidence to establish probable cause).

Magnolia Petroleum Co. v. McGeeley

203 Okla. 470 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 17, 1950

The rule applicable to these questions is well established. In Eagle Loan Co. v. … They did not qualify as experts as to the effects of salt water on soil, vegetation or water. It is doubtful if they were qualified to testify as to the value of the farm before and after the pollution by salt water.

In Re Curtis

38 B.R. 364 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Oct 28, 1983

To qualify to request relief under this subsection, would-be petitioners must be holders of claims. … This court need not decide exactly what showing will suffice to establish the existence of a claim and qualify a would-be petitioner as “holder of a claim” under § 303(b)(1).

Gilbert-Mitchell v. Gerlach

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Feb 21, 2023

Finally, defendant Gerlach objects to the Report’s conclusion that he is not entitled to judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. … He contends no constitutional violation by him has been shown and that the law as to his potential liability is not clearly established.

Public Svc. Co. v. Duncan Pub. Util. Autho.

248 P.3d 400 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 29, 2010

This foundation is a private foundation established to administer a one-half cent sales tax dedicated for economic development in the Duncan area. … DP & L also argues these laws to be contrary to the constitutional ban on exclusive franchises and the constitutional prohibition against legislation granting exclusive rights, privileges or immunities.

Shaffer v. Howard

250 F. 873 · District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Feb 4, 1918

The relief sought presents.matters clearly of equitable cognizance, and hence we conclude that this court has jurisdiction. … The United States Constitution, art. 4, § 2, provides that: “The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens of the several states,” —and among such privileges and immunities

Oklahoma Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Dillard

208 Okla. 126 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 10, 1953

Kelso, a qualified medical expert, and that of Mr. … While the instruction given omits the requirement of expert testimony to establish the causal connection between the injury and alleged wrongful acts of the defendant, it clearly tells the jury that unless it finds that plaintiff

Kansas City Southern Railway Company v. Norwood

367 P.2d 722 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 10, 1961

stated: “A large discretion is vested in the trial court in determining the competency and qualifications of jurors, and its action should never be disturbed by an appellate court, unless an abuse of such discretion is clearly … It is sufficient if it reasonably tends to establish such fact. Oklahoma Ry. Co. v. Wilson, 204 Okl. 90 , 227 P.2d 392 .

Nixon v. Roberts

420 P.2d 898 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 1, 1966

named in groups ‘A’ and ‘B’ shall have such number of regular or technical deputies, assistants, * * * whatever title the principal officer may ascribe to the duties or functions to be performed as authorized by law and clearly … assistant and would not continue as assistant at the reduced salary, and no qualified replacement could be secured; and that the reasons given by defendants for their action were personal and did not pertain to their legal

Winton v. Board of Commissioners

188 F.R.D. 398 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Aug 16, 1999

The Senate Judiciary Committee’s report on Rule 501 states as follows: It should be clearly understood that, in approving this general rule as to privileges, the action of Congress should not be understood as disapproving … Yet, ‘[t]he mere fact that litigation does eventually ensue does not, by itself, cloak materials’ with work product immunity. Binks Mfg. Co. v. National Presto Indus., Inc., 709 F.2d 1109 , 1118 (7th Cir.1983).

Beauchamp v. Oklahoma City

477 P.2d 51 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 16, 1970

Plaintiff alleges that only qualified property tax paying voters were permitted to vote at the election, and thereby she was excluded from voting. … Tettleton clearly establishes that an action may be maintained to challenge the legality of a bond election prior to the performance of the Bond Commissioner.

Higgins v. Pipkin

348 P.2d 330 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 22, 1959

While the right to submit cases such as the instant case to a jury is established by 58 O.S.1951 § 735, the verdict of the jury is merely advisory and the court must ultimately determine all questions of fact as well as law … The judgment appealed from is not clearly against the weight of the evidence and for said reason will be permitted to stand. Affirmed. WILLIAMS, V. C. J., and WELCH, HALLEY, BLACKBIRD, JACKSON and IRWIN, JJ., concur.

Gordon v. State

649 P.2d 807 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Aug 10, 1982

I believe, however, that this general rule must be qualified. 1 If the cause of the victim’s death is solely attributable to grossly improper medical treatment and not at all attributable to the original wound inflicted by … However, the record clearly establishes that the appellant did inflict life threatening wounds which directly gave rise to perforations in the victim’s bladder and extensive damage to the small intestines.

City of Ardmore v. Donham

328 P.2d 438 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 2, 1958

It will be noted that this latter description clearly describes land to the south of the county road right of way as now located. … Plaintiff’s evidence as to this issue merely established that the road has been in the same general location for the requisite number of years, and fell short of establishing that the use had extended as far south as the

Opinion No. 72-253 (1972) Ag

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jan 12, 1973

** Summary ** WATER RESOURCES BOARD AUTHORITY TO ESTABLISH RESTRICTIONS UNDER PERMITS GRANTED The Oklahoma Water Resources Board has the authority to establish time restrictions on the use of water under a validly granted … This particular portion of the statute clearly grants great latitude to the Board in their determination of water rights applications.

Ashland Oil, Inc. v. Corporation Commission

595 P.2d 423 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 6, 1979

Additionally, as the Commission correctly points out, the Court in Minshall clearly limited its consideration to the application of 52 O.S.Supps.1965-1969, §§ 309-315 on the question of an operator’s responsibility and did … By its order against Ashland, the Commission has not granted immunity to other possible offenders. Ashland may not rely upon the possible shortcomings of others to evade their own obligation.