Case law

Claxton v. Barrowman

266 P.2d 966 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 12, 1954

Plaintiff objected upon the grounds he already was qualified, and refused to take such examination. … Rather, examination of the various sections clearly reveals that the state was enacting positive legislation regulating the plumbing business in every city or town within the territorial limits of the state having in population

Opinion No. 90-Xxx (1990)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Mar 26, 1990

(CITATION OMITTED) THE SALES SLIPS DO, HOWEVER, QUALIFY AS "ITEMS". AN ITEM IS "ANY INSTRUMENT FOR THE PAYMENT OF MONEY EVEN THOUGH IT IS NOT NEGOTIABLE BUT DOES NOT INCLUDE MONEY". (CITATION OMITTED). … THIS SECTION OF LAW ALSO ESTABLISHES THE DUTY OF MOST STATE AGENCIES, OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES TO MAKE DEPOSITS INTO THESE AGENCY CLEARING ACCOUNTS AND AGENCY SPECIAL ACCOUNTS SUBPART B OF SECTION 7.1 PROVIDES IN PERTINENT

Ex Parte Hudspeth

271 P.2d 371 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 1, 1954

The argument to support this contention is based upon the language of several of our earlier decisions,1 all holding to the effect that to justify a court in depriving a parent of his child’s custody the evidence must clearly … Thus, there being no evidence establishing his unfitness, it was reversible error for the trial court to refuse to issue the writ.

Pennington v. Newman

36 Okla. 594 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 7, 1913

Pennington is the duly appointed, qualified, and acting administrator of the estate *595 of W. M. Newman, deceased. … The record clearly shows that prior to the appointment of an administrator, Joe Newman and W. E. Newman, adult sons of the deceased by a former wife, and Mrs. Lillie A.

ALFALFA ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. v. MID-CONTINENT CASUALTY COMPANY

350 P.3d 1276 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 19, 2014

As part of the general and shipping public, AEC qualifies as an intended beneficiary of the MCA's protections. See also Casualty Reciprocal Exchange v. … [or] to establish or create (something unwanted) in a forceful way." Webster's Third International Dictionary, p. 1136.

Gibson v. State

501 P.2d 891 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 27, 1972

Earlier, on the day he testified, the court granted him immunity against prosecution for anything he might testify to concerning any part he played in this “drama.” … The rule was established by this Court in the early case of Beshirs v.

Lloyd v. State Ex Rel. Department of Highways

428 P.2d 261 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 25, 1967

The expert witnesses of .the plaintiff were shown to be qualified and the amount of damages awarded by the court was within the range of the expert testimony presented. … In our opinion the trial court’s determination of the facts and judgment thereon in the amount of $15,000.00 is not clearly against the weight of the evidence, but to the contrary, is fully supported by competent evidence

Triangle Fraternity v. City of Norman, Ex Rel. Norman Board of Adjustment

73 O.B.A.J. 2914 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 15, 2002

Even if the question of whether the nonconforming use had changed were not reviewed de novo, under the evidence presented, the Board’s decision was arbitrary and clearly erroneous and the judgment of the trial court clearly … (b) Re-established after discontinuance for two years. (c) Extended except in conformity to this Ordinance.

Darnell v. Higgins

140 Okla. 31 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 10, 1929

S. 1921, and section 10321, Id., qualified electors of any part of a school district, aggrieved by reason of an order made by the county superintendent of public instruction attaching certain adjacent territory to a consolidated … S. 1921, primarily relates to and provides the procedure for establishing a consolidated school or district, but contains the following material proviso which concerns and authorizes the attaching of territory to a consolidated

Terrell v. Scott

129 Okla. 78 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 27, 1927

If so plain a proposition required any authority to support it, it is clearly maintained in United States v. Hooe, 3 Cranch, 73 , 2 L. Ed. 370 . … It does not consider the estate of the mortgagee as defeated and, reduced to a mere lien, but it treats it as a trust estate, and, according to the intention of the parties, as a qualified estate, and security.

Yoakum v. Yukon Public Works

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Nov 25, 2019

Qualified Immunity At the close of their motion, Defendants argue that Mr. … Nov. 17, 2014) (finding no need to reach the issue of qualified immunity because Plaintiff did not allege sufficient facts to establish Eighth Amendment violation). VII.

Laub v. State

49 Okla. Crim. 171 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 2, 1930

The delay of a day would often be fatal to effectiveness and afford immunity, smacking somewhat of the antiquated right of sanctuary, for the criminal.” … Measures taken to prevent the unlawful traffic in intoxicating liquors are clearly measures taken to preserve the peace of the community; they prevent lawlessness and intoxication, and tend to the establishment of law and

Sorge v. Graham

312 P.2d 929 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 30, 1957

Plaintiff further contends that the opinion evidence given by the lay witnesses above mentioned was incompetent for the reason that the witnesses were not qualified to testify as experts. … We cannot say that the judgment is clearly against the weight of the evidence. It will therefore not be disturbed on appeal. Judgment affirmed. WELCH, C. J., CORN, V. C.

David v. Crow

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jul 19, 2024

immunity.2 II. … The Eleventh Amendment grants states immunity from suits brought pursuant to § 1983 unless such immunity is specifically waived or overridden by Congress. See Welch v. Tex.

Purdy v. Carter

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Sep 24, 2024

To establish the objective component, the alleged deprivation must be sufficiently serious to constitute a deprivation of constitutional dimension. … Plaintiff did not plead sufficient facts to establish he is a qualified individual with a disability.

County of Okmulgee ex rel. Board of County Commissioners

368 P.2d 502 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 23, 1962

A qualified witness testified that the fair market value of the land prior to reconstruction of the highway was $30.00 an acre, or $3,210.00, and that the value of the house was $3,500.00; that following and as a result of … Assuming that the alleged fact of a building site was not clearly established or if established that the value thereof was not proved, there would remain competent evidence showing that plaintiffs’ damages were approximately

Lum v. Lee Way Motor Freight, Inc.

757 P.2d 810 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 10, 1987

Clearly the Western Hardware agreement was retrospective. … Lee Way did, in fact, obtain insurance with a qualified carrier for injuries incurred after August 6, 1984. On August 29, 1984, PepsiCo withdrew its guaranty. 34 .

Matter of Protest of 1990-1991 Budget

848 P.2d 30 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 28, 1992

The Legislature clearly intended to authorize an "incentive" levy in addition to other levies when approved by the voters in a school area. There are no stated exceptions. … We therefore do not accept protesters attempt to establish the meaning of the prior Art.

Bonnett v. State Ex Rel. Newer

47 Okla. 503 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 1, 1915

Board of County Commissioners, 5 Okla. 570 , 49 Pac. 1012 ), the same seems to be judicial in its nature, and clearly within the power of the board to perform. Brazell et al. v. … Clearly, as the former act establishes courts immediately upon its taking effect and refers to conditions then existing, while the latter act establishes *513 nothing at the time but authorizes future action only, and as

Reynolds v. Special Indemnity Fund

725 P.2d 1265 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 23, 1986

This is so because, as reflected by the quantum of the settlement award, the reopening claim against the employer clearly was time barred. … [The Court of Appeals apparently omitted the 2.2% disability established by the joint-petition settlement.]