Case law

Agee v. Gant

412 P.2d 155 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 15, 1966

The trial court believed the jury panel to be competent and qualified. In Kansas City Southern Railway Company v. … 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

Rogers v. Meiser

74 O.B.A.J. 967 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 4, 2003

It is not clear, however, that the immunity granted and the concomitant limit of remedy has as its intent so broad a sweep as to engulf all previously existing common law claims. … A written property condition disclosure statement on a form established by rule by the Oklahoma Real Estate Commission which shall include the information set forth in subsection B of this section. B. 1.

State v. McCray

15 Okla. Crim. 316 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 14, 1918

Wildman, the duly qualified and acting county attorney, in and for Creek county, state of Oklahoma, and upon his oath of office gives the district court of Creek county, state of Oklahoma, to know and be informed that William … Laws 1910, defines the term “maliciously,” when employed in the chapter relating to crimes against the property of another, to “import a wish to vex, annoy or injure another person, established either by proof or presumption

SHAWAREB v. SSM HEALTH CARE OF OKLAHOMA

480 P.3d 894 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 24, 2020

They argued plaintiffs' expert, a "certified nurse assistant" did not possess authority to prescribe or administer narcotics and was "clearly not qualified to render the neurologic and narcotics-related opinions relied upon … Defendants asserted plaintiffs did not produce any qualified expert testimony to support their claims.

Edwards v. State

94 Okla. Crim. 11 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Feb 14, 1951

But clearly, such is not the situation confronting us herein. He further relies on the case of Padgett v. State, 90 Okla. … It Is an- established custom relied upon in every day transactions with the grocer, druggist, filling station operator, and all other sellers of merchandise to rely upon the brands which appear upon packages and cartons.

Opinion No. 78-220 (1978) Ag

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jul 31, 1978

A reading of the entire Act clearly reveals that the Legislature intended that it be highly restrictive, facilitating the greatest possible control and policing of conduct of bingo games. … Permission for qualifying organizations to conduct bingo games does not imply an authorization to hire oneself out in such capacity.

McAlister v. State Ex Rel. Walton

96 Okla. 143 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 4, 1923

It is therefore necessary to the decision that there be clearly ascertained, determined, and respected that boundary line that separates political power and judicial authority and defines their respective limits. … At all events, it is not a binding enactment until its enactment is completed, and, until it is a binding enactment, it retains its relationship to the political power, and is immune from the process of judicial authority

City of Enid v. Public Employees Relations Board

133 P.3d 281 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 14, 2006

They create preference and establish inequality. … An injunction will be affirmed on appeal unless it is clearly against the weight of evidence, contrary to law or established principles of equity. Sharp v. 251st Street Landfill, Inc., 925 P.2d at 549 .

Shirley v. State

325 P.2d 92 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Apr 23, 1958

The defense presented a number of witnesses to establish that defendant was not driving at the time of the arrest. … A thorough review of the records clearly reflects that the preponderance of the evidence is favorable to the defendant.

Garrett v. Vaughan (In Re Vaughan)

261 B.R. 700 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Feb 16, 2001

Again, Vaughan’s beneficial interest in the Trust is clearly covered by the statute. … It is clear from a plain reading of these statutory provisions that the undisputed facts in this case establish that the Disclaimer does not qualify as a statutory disclaimer under Oklahoma law.

Berg v. State

29 Okla. Crim. 112 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jan 17, 1925

It is also contended that the law in question is unconstitutional for the reason that it does not clearly and explicitly set out the acts which constitute the offense. … Well, they stand for tearing down our flag and our form of government and establishing a form of government of their own, and worshipping the red flag instead of the American flag.”

Burnett v. Davis

27 Okla. 124 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 13, 1910

Some of the grounds are not supported by the record and are so clearly without merit as not to require discussion here, but other grounds assigned are based upon facts disclosed by the record and require consideration. … In the Boser case, as in the case at bar, the record was silent as to notice of the time of settling the case, and the court permitted proof outside of the record to establish that such notice was given. *126 Dismissal is

Question Submitted by: The Honorable John Haste, Oklahoma State Senate, District 36

2024 OK AG 4 · Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Feb 28, 2024

Do the changes enacted in HB2263 qualify as the Legislature exercising unconstitutional coercive influence over the Turnpike Authority? I. … In light of Transportation I , the Legislature established the Council, and the duties and powers of the LBOC devolved upon the newly created Council.

IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF FORESEE

2020 OK 88 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 13, 2020

This section establishes a priority list of individuals for purposes of conferring control over a deceased person's remains. … An instrument expressly assigning the right to dispose of one's body most clearly carries out a decedent's intent.

Higgins v. State

506 P.2d 575 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Feb 6, 1973

The record reflects the amendment was over the objection of the appellant and that thereafter the trial court overruled a mo.tion for a continuance in order to establish a defense or adequately prepare for the defense. … However, the record clearly reflects that the co-defendant, Joyce High, testified that the appellant checked them into that motel using the name Janice Summers.

Douglas v. Cox Retirement Properties, Inc.

302 P.3d 789 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 4, 2013

Article 5, § 57 of the Oklahoma Constitution provides: "Every act of the Legislature shall embrace but one subject, which shall be clearly expressed in its title...." Okla. Const. art. 5, § 57. … The Act creates immunity from suit only for entities defined under the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and by its terms eliminates remedies for certain injured consumers.

American Insurance Ass'n v. State Industrial Commission

745 P.2d 737 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 3, 1987

The initial question we must determine is whether the controversy sought to be presented has been rendered moot, in whole or in part, by the passage of after-enacted legislation. 7 It is a long-established rule that this … law between nisi prius and appellate decisions compels the appellate court to apply the latest version of the pertinent law. 14 It is quite apparent that all the post-§ 149.1 enactments on the subject here in contest were clearly

Consolidated Flour Mills Co. v. Muegge

127 Okla. 295 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 13, 1927

“The fact that the business carried on by a corporation is entirely interstate in its character does not render the corporation immune from the ordinary process of the courts of the state.’’ In the St. … The rule directly applicable to this case is clearly stated by tbe Supreme Court of Georgia in the case of Pickens Co. v. Thomas, 152 Ga. 648 , 111 S. E. 27 , 21 A. L.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Local 798 of the United Ass'n of Journeymen

646 F. Supp. 318 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Sep 5, 1986

The framework established by the Supreme Court in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. … For *325 each of these years, members clearly understood blacks and females were not allowed to be members nor recruited for membership.

Price v. State ex rel. State Employees Group Health, Dental & Life Insurance Board

757 P.2d 839 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 5, 1988

The Board shall have the right to require proof of such total disability to qualify for the above described extended benefits. … Appellee would clearly be entitled to receive benefits *844 if she had elected to keep her son home from school. The State Board's Order was clearly erroneous and in error of law. See 75 O.S.1981, § 322(l)(d) & (e).