Case law

Security Nat. Bank v. Truscon Steel Co.

92 Okla. 81 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 10, 1923

A receiver was appointed on September 8, 1919, and qualified on September 9, 1919. … That case, we think, is clearly not in point.

Pelican Production Corp. v. Mize

573 P.2d 703 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 29, 1977

It consists of the testimony of seven witnesses, most of whom qualified as experts in their particular fields, and documentary exhibits. Pelican presented the testimony of Mr. … We therefore hold that the judgment of the trial court refusing to grant the vari- *707 anee is clearly against the weight of the evidence.

Smith v. State

144 P.3d 159 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 28, 2006

However, if the testimony of a qualified expert was presented to the jury, Appellant might have been acquitted. … This *169 clearly establishes a reasonable probability that but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. ¶ 46 Therefore, Appellant’s conviction should be reversed and this

Vinson v. Cook

76 Okla. 46 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 9, 1919

Vinson, was designated as successor, gave, bond and qualified on November 26. 1913. and continued to act as administrator until the 13th day of May, 1914, at which time he was by order of the county court, suspended and directed … Others denied this claim and sought to establish that they were also interested in the estate as heirs of the deceased. Considering the amount involved, (he litigation promised to be protracted, bitter and expensive.

Mustang Fuel Corp. v. Hatch

890 F. Supp. 995 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jul 18, 1995

In 1929, they adopted a written constitution and established an elected, representative form of government. … While clearly the nature of the lands involved in a case may be crucial, the Court finds the Supreme Court’s analysis instructive.

United States v. McVeigh

918 F. Supp. 1452 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jan 24, 1996

Some appellate courts have sought to distinguish the common law principle of openness from the qualified First Amendment right of access. … Indeed, *1467 they are clearly premature and probably moot since the reassignment of this case. Some documents have been unsealed. by orders entered by Magistrate Judge How-land by agreement of the parties.

HILL v. AMERICAN MEDICAL RESPONSE

2018 OK 57 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 26, 2018

A statute will be upheld unless it is clearly, palpably, and plainly inconsistent with the Constitution. Id. … He asserts that mandatory use of the AMA Guides, Sixth Edition, is an arbitrarily-designed employer immunity that shifts the economic loss to an innocent injured employee.

OBI HOLDING COMPANY v. SCHULTZ-BUTZBACH AND THE WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION

2025 OK 55 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 9, 2025

Clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, material, probative and substantial competent evidence; 6. Arbitrary and capricious; 7. Procured by fraud; or 8. … A legislative act is presumed to be constitutional and will be upheld by this Court unless it is clearly, palpably and plainly inconsistent with the Constitution. Id . A.

Bennett v. Windstream Communications, Inc.

30 F. Supp. 3d 1243 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Jun 27, 2014

Under McDonnell Douglas, the aggrieved employee must first establish a prima facie case by showing: (1) she is a member of a protected class; (2) she suffered an adverse employment action; (3) she was qualified for the position … Clearly Bennett was unhappy with her job after the Windstream takeover. However, “not every unhappy employee has an actionable claim of constructive discharge pursuant to Title VII.” Bolden v.

Affordable Residential Communities 7, L.L.C. v. Canadian County Assessor

150 P.3d 399 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 14, 2006

although § 8B appears to be self-executing in part ("the fair cash value of any parcel of locally assessed real property shall not increase by more than five percent (5%) in any taxable year"), a clear reading of the provision establishes … See Glass, 1982 OK 2, at ¶ 13 , 639 P.2d at 12838 (the Legislature may act to implement the Constitution, and may qualify or curtail its provisions).

IN RE INITIATIVE PETITION NO. 448, STATE QUESTION NO. 836; THE OKLAHOMA REPUBLICAN PARTY v. SETTER

2025 OK 56 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 16, 2025

any qualified voter could vote for any candidate without regard to party affiliation. … If only two candidates for a covered office qualify to appear on the ballot, then those candidates would automatically advance to the general election.

Hamilton v. Duffy

540 P.2d 600 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Feb 18, 1975

Duffy, both of whom were licensed and qualified Doctors of Osteopathy, for damages alleged to have been caused by medical malpractice. … What that verdict contained is hotly disputed by the parties and cannot be established by the record because of the absence of the reporter.

Whitehead v. Tulsa Public Schools

69 O.B.A.J. 2510 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 7, 1998

Clearly, until today extant jurisprudence and the clear language of 12 O.S.Supp. 1996, § 990A would have dictated the dismissal of this appeal as untimely. … SUMMERS, V.C.J., dissenting, joined by SIMMS, HARGRAVE, and WATT, JJ. ¶ 1 To qualify for the "mailing rule" the Legislature has written into law the requirement of sending the petition "by certified mail return receipt requested

KEEVER v. BIG LOTS STORES, INC.

362 P.3d 231 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 30, 2015

Trinidad's September 10, 2009 medical report, Bishop clearly supports consideration by the trial court of all medical evidence relevant to the § 5(C) defense that the employee is physically unable to perform assigned duties … Further, her own evidentiary materials uncontrovert-edly establish that "sometime prior to receiving [that] final work release ...

Fitzpatrick v. McAlister

121 Okla. 83 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 28, 1926

We now have before us an actual and clearly definfed problem with the provisions of the Constitution as our only rule for solution. … To our mind, it is so clearly correct ’ that no one has ever presumed to test its correctness in the courts.

Wilson v. Harlow

64 O.B.A.J. 2261 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 13, 1993

However, Hargrave is clearly distinguishable from the case at bar, which concerns a corporation rather than a cooperative. … As our Constitution clearly commands, the commission’s exercise of rate-making authority may never be “questioned” anywhere else except on regular review prescribed by law.

OKLAHOMA CHAP. OF AMER. ACA., PEDIAT. v. Fogarty

366 F. Supp. 2d 1050 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Mar 22, 2005

Title XIX established a joint, cooperative federal-state program for furnishing and financing health care and services to individuals who qualify for cash or welfare assistance. Tr. Vol. IX, at 1126: 5-10. … In addition, immunizations are to be given in accordance with the schedule established by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices for pediatric vaccines. 42 U.S.C. § 1396d(r)(1)(A)(i); State Medicaid Manual, Pl.Ex

Marshall v. Kelly

465 F. Supp. 341 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Dec 29, 1978

In addition, these accounts did not satisfy the definition of a “qualified” account under the security agreement. … No renewal of any note or other outstanding obligation to the Plan may be made unless same is clearly in keeping with ERISA law and rules and regulations there *355 under promulgated.

Jaquez

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Feb 23, 2026

The District Attorney Defendants assert they are entitled to qualified immunity. See Dkt. No. 38 at 9-12. … Furthermore, the Cherokee County Jail Defendants did not raise, let alone adequately brief, the issue of qualified immunity. Cf. Berryman v.

Cook v. Morrison

270 P.2d 320 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 4, 1954

The rule is well established that where a will has been admitted to probate the burden of proof rests upon contestants to establish lack of testamentáry capacity. … “It is not sufficient, to defeat a will, merely to establish that the testator was a victim of some delusion.