Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
5,409 results
2.43s
437 F. Supp. 828 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Aug 22, 1977
It is well established that a municipal corporation is not a person within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . City of Kenosha v. Bruno, 412 U.S. 507 , 93 S.Ct. 2222 , 37 L.Ed.2d 109 (1973); Monroe v. … Poresky, 290 U.S. 30 , 54 S.Ct. 3 , 78 L.Ed. 152 (1933), the Supreme Court explained substantiality: “The question may be plainly unsubstantial, either because it is ‘obviously without merit’ or because ‘its unsoundness so clearly
Cited 0 timesPublished307 P.2d 168 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Feb 6, 1957
But, the facts in the case at bar are clearly distinguishable from the situation therein involved. … The fact that he may have committed two crimes gives him no immunity from prosecution of either.
Cited 2 timesPublished125 P.3d 1249 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 15, 2005
Id. ¶ 7 At issue in the trial court was whether decedent qualified as an “insured” under Policy No. 246-2801-C13-36H. … Because Plaintiff was a participant in the alleged conversation she had with decedent regarding his residence, she “clearly had access to the relevant evidence at” the time of her deposition. Id.
Cited 7 timesPublishedGrace Petroleum Corp. v. Department of Energy
456 F. Supp. 945 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Aug 31, 1978
Accordingly, each property will qualify for the stripper well exemption. … The fact that Grace will continue to do business as usual if it is not permitted to certify its properties clearly indicates the absence of immediate and irreparable injury. 7.
Cited 2 timesPublished75 O.B.A.J. 1949 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · May 25, 2004
What Gipson leaves out of his analysis is that the Board Secretary clearly qualified her testimony by stating that the 2,026 figure represented registered voters residing in the county, while the statute requires a certain … Throughout this process of analysis it is the opponent's ultimate burden of proving non-registration clearly and convincingly.
Cited 0 timesPublished497 P.2d 1062 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 23, 1972
partisan ambition that would be possible in the case of management by either Legislature or executive, chosen at frequent intervals and for functions and because of qualities and activities vastly different from those which qualify … The territorial statutes established a “normal school”, but the University of Oklahoma was to have a “normal department”, Okla.Stats.1890, §§ 6788, 6792.
Cited 10 timesPublishedNational Ins. Underwriters v. Walker
206 Okla. 629 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 1, 1952
That the contract not being ambiguous, the court improperly permitted plaintiff to establish by oral testimony .what was meant by the term “taxiing”. … Plaintiff cites numerous cases to the effect that when an insurance contract is ambiguous and obtuse, that oral testimony is admissible to establish the actual intent of the parties.
Cited 6 timesPublished10 Okla. 424 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 4, 1900
Clearly the immediate tendency of the remarks was simply to induce a more careful and anxious consideration of the case, to let the jury understand that they should make an effort to agree upon a verdict, simply, but not … It seems to us that the entire conversation between the court and the jury is qualified, and its meaning and understanding modified by the remark: “If you will read the instructions of the court I think they are plain.”
Cited 18 timesPublishedTrustees of Church of God v. Nussbaum
199 Okla. 175 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 23, 1947
Citation of authority is unnecessary to support the rule that in cases of equitable cognizance this court will weigh the evidence, but will not reverse the judgment unless clearly against the weight thereof. … Defendants’ argument in support of the trial court’s findings upon the second fact question is contrary to the record evidence, which conclusively establishes that the Church of God mentioned by the testator was established
Cited 1 timesPublishedDistrict Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jul 30, 2021
Qualified immunity Strickland and Stillings assert they are entitled to qualified immunity as to Plaintiffs’ claims. … 2) the right was clearly established at the time of the violation.”
Cited 0 timesUnknown279 F. 136 · District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Mar 15, 1922
James, decided this day, ante, 88; but Congress did .not confer upon the Secretary of the Interior authority to exercise such power under the circumstances of this case or to give to property purchased with released funds immunity … Ed. 807 , it is said: “The general rule of law is, that a proviso carves special exceptions only out of the body of the act; and those who set up any such exception must establish it, as being within the words as well as
Cited 1 timesPublished65 O.B.A.J. 33 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 16, 1993
sua sponte. 13 When a member of the law-making assembly initiates legal proceedings in a representational capacity as a senator or a member of the House of Representatives, that legislator can claim no elevated status in establishing … of justiciability hence clearly met. 29 III.
Cited 99 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Oct 20, 1975
services constitute a part of his supervised course of study, and if such person is designated by such title as 'speech pathology intern,' 'speech pathology trainee,' 'audiology intern,' 'audiology trainee' or other such title clearly … Title 59 O.S. 1605 [ 59-1605 ] (1974), states that supervision must be provided by individuals licensed or qualified in the appropriate area.
Cited 0 timesPublishedRural Water District 3 v. Owasso Utilities Authority
530 F. Supp. 818 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Jul 3, 1979
This is undoubtedly due to Article 5, § 51, Oklahoma Constitution, which prohibits the granting of “exclusive rights, privileges or immunities” by the Legislature. … In this case, in its dealings with Hilliary, the City was clearly acting in a proprietary, and not a governmental, capacity. Comanche County, supra, at 492.
Cited 29 timesPublishedCarter Oil Co. v. Oklahoma Tax Commission
166 Okla. 1 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 17, 1933
This congressional act clearly provides that after April 26, 1981, oil and gas produced under-lease of the character held by plaintiff in this case shall be subject to all state tax, thus clearly giving congressional sanction … Not every governmental *4 instrumentality is immune from taxation as is evidenced by tbe reasoning in Shaw v. Gibson-Zabniser Oil Corp., 276 U. S. 576 , 72 L.
Cited 4 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Jun 11, 2024
May 21, 1996) (“Considering that this case is set for a nonjury trial, this court will be able to review the complete evidence, and revisit the qualified immunity issue at that time. … Accordingly, the motion for summary judgment as to the issue of qualified immunity is denied.”).
Cited 0 timesUnknownSTATE ex rel. DEPT. OF HUMAN SERVICES v. COLDWATER
2016 OK CIV APP 3 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 22, 2015
If Mother can establish the requirements of § 118(C)(D)(2)(a), then the trial court must follow § 118C(D)(2)(b) and (c). … Once the trial court determines the number of qualified prior-born children, then that number can be inserted on the Child Support Computation form to determine the deduction amount.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · May 13, 2009
Electronic communications that qualify as "records" are subject to the Open Records Act and Records Management Act. … Rather, that determination depends upon whether the information qualifies as a record as defined in the ORA and/or RMA.
Cited 0 timesPublished423 P.2d 447 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 25, 1966
Marshall, 200 Okl. 573 , 197 P.2d 990 , syllabus 3 follows this principle: “Where the rights of parties are clearly defined and established by law, equity has no power to change or unsettle those rights, but in all such instances … Tulsa Yellow Cab, etc., Co., 178 Okl. 15 , 61 P.2d 645 , are clearly distinguishable from the present case and not controlling.
Cited 42 timesPublishedOklahoma Attorney General Reports · Dec 5, 1977
If the answer is no, the authority to establish such regulations must come from the Legislature. … Clearly, the authority the Board possesses does not extend so far as to allow it, in essence, the sole discretion to decide flood plain standards.
Cited 0 timesPublished
Ask Donna