Case law

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Wendt

708 P.2d 581 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 22, 1985

Thus depending upon the particular policy under which recovery is sought, these vehicles ostensibly qualify, (or do not qualify), as "insured motor vehicles". … The claimant qualified as an insured by virtue of his status as a resident relative of the named insured.

Edwards v. State of Oklahoma

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jul 10, 2025

Although “Eleventh Amendment immunity does not extend to a state official sued in his official capacity when the plaintiff seeks only prospective, injunctive relief,” Tarrant Reg'l Water Dist. v. … Additionally, to the extent the motion seeks some sort of preliminary injunction, he has not complied with the requirements set out in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65 or established that the factors governing whether

Ex Parte Davis

82 Okla. Crim. 444 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Aug 28, 1946

by extrinsic evidence, and the burden is upon one who challenges the ordinance imposing it to establish its unreasonableness and invalidity.” … “Ordinances imposing license taxes under the power to regulate are prima facie valid, and the unreasonableness of the exactions must be made clearly to appear, and they must be obviously and largely beyond wliat is needed

Wright & Edwards v. Oklahoma Employment Security Commission

68 O.B.A.J. 915 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 11, 1997

Clearly, under the statutory language, the Commission is a party to the proceedings and is entitled to appeal. … The Vermont court later qualified this statement, in Lincoln v.

Taylor v. Cache Creek Nursing Centers

891 P.2d 607 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 15, 1994

Plaintiff, to qualify under section 5, must demonstrate a prima facie case under Buckner v. … Based on the above, plaintiff has clearly met the first three elements of the test.

Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co. v. Oliphant

172 Okla. 635 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 26, 1935

the facts should be clearly proved.” … Assignments of error 1 and 2 are her© presented, and are stated sufficiently clearly in the language above. Under section 398, O.

Sullivan v. Buckhorn Ranch Partnership

76 O.B.A.J. 1387 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 14, 2005

The facts, taken together, clearly raise issues of material fact regarding whether Sullivan received the benefits of the transaction or even made the conveyance with full knowledge of the purpose and source of the benefits … We determine that because the evidentiary materials are clearly not dispositive of the material questions of fact regarding the application of 16 0.8.2001 § 11, 29 the trial court entered summary judgment prematurely. b.

Bond v. Regalado

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Aug 11, 2021

Analysis As an initial matter, Whitman argues he is entitled to qualified immunity. … immunity.”

STATE v. SHADE

2017 OK CIV APP 68 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 16, 2017

Hence, § 18 merely sets forth who qualifies to file a motion for expungement. … Nevertheless, a petitioner must establish that "one of the § 18 circumstances is shown to exist," and only then is "a prima facie showing of harm . . . made." Holder , ¶ 5 .

Weinert v. Pushmataha County Municipal District

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Mar 24, 2025

immunity. … Qualified Immunity Both Defendants Hedgecock and Roden assert they are entitled to qualified immunity. See Dkt. No. 57 at 19-30.

Cartwright v. Holcomb

21 Okla. 548 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 24, 1908

This is clearly wrong, and is contrary to the statutes of Oklahoma.” On the first proposition counsel for plaintiff in error contends that, notwithstanding section 1807, Wilson’s Rev. & Ann. … But this rule is qualified by another, which requires only a prima facie showing of the validity of the will and its due execution to entitle it to probate.” From another case cited by plaintiff in error (Craig v.

Hutchings v. Winsor

92 Okla. 37 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 24, 1923

Winsor died, and the plaintiff, his wife, had been duly appointed and qualified as executrix of his estate; that due demand had been made upon the defendant for the payment of said indebtedness and payment refused by the … That this is true is conclusively established, not only by the answer of defendant in which he entered a general denial that ho had ever borrowed any sum from the plaintiff’s testator, but by his answer to the interrogatory

United States v. Allen

171 F. 907 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Oklahoma · Aug 6, 1909

Whether the Indians of the Five Civilized Tribes at the time of the passing of the enabling act were citizens of the United States or not, its terms clearly make them electors and give them the right to participate in the … In my judgment,,therefore, the members of the Five Civilized Tribes are citizens of the United States, with all the rights, privileges, and immunities of citizenship.

Box v. State

541 P.2d 262 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 1, 1975

Defendant’s next assignment of error urges that the trial court erred in overruling the defendant’s motion to strike the testimony of Officer Lippman for the reason that he was not qualified as an expert to identify that … This rule is particularly applicable where accused’s guilt is clearly established by the evidence.” We believe this to be applicable in the instant case.

Pikas v. Williams Companies, Inc.

822 F. Supp. 2d 1163 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Sep 30, 2011

The weight of Circuit case law holds a cause of action accrues at the time when the facts, not the law, establishing an ERISA violation become known to the beneficiary. Meagher v. … Thus, with regard to Pikas, his claim was not clearly repudiated until after Williams denied his administrative claim on April 22, 2004.

First National Bank of El Reno v. Oklahoma Tax Commission

185 Okla. 98 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 21, 1939

As grounds for establishing the invalidity of the state act, it is urged that the same constitutes an attempt to impose a tax upon income derived from securities and instru-mentalities of the United States, which income is … The state act and the permissive federal act involved herein clearly indicate that such a tax was contemplated and levied; therefore, under the authorities, no state or federal constitutional provision has been contravened

Wallace v. Transport Life Insurance Co.

841 P.2d 613 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Feb 25, 1992

Rule 72 was promulgated by the State Insurance Commissioner pursuant to 36 O.S.Supp. 1990 § 3611(B)(4) which reads: The department [Insurance Commission] shall adopt rules and regulations which establish minimum standards … The Plan clearly provides for a reduction of disability payments as a result of Social Security benefits, if a claimant is entitled to Social Security.

Henderson v. State ex rel. Board of Review

71 O.B.A.J. 1347 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 7, 1999

Clearly, this conclusion is factually and legally erroneous. … Thus, the Court ruled that the jobs were adversely affected by imports in a manner to qualify under the Trade Act for eligibility to apply for benefits. IV.

In Re Swaim

66 Okla. Crim. 30 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Apr 7, 1939

hogs conducted in establishment 20-Q storage quarters located in building 2, establishment 20-Q as provided for in said license. … That the meaning of “post mortem examinations of hyper immune hogs conducted in establishment 20-Q storage quarters located in building 2, establishment 20-Q” is that Fidelity Laboratories, Inc., was authorized by said license

DOE v. THE FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH U.S.A. OF TULSA

2017 OK 106 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 19, 2017

We went further: "The First Amendment clearly safeguards the freedom to worship as well as the freedom not to worship ." Id. … I, qualifies under "unless otherwise provided by law." See Reeds , 2006 OK 43 at ¶11; U.S. Const. art.