Case law

Murphy v. State

124 P.3d 1198 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 7, 2005

This statute provided that highways or roads may be established along all section lines located within the Creek or Muscogee Nation.... … Section 1151 clearly makes a distinction between the two. 19 .

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.

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

Dillman v. Winchester

639 F. Supp. 2d 1257 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jun 9, 2009

Stat. tit. 51 § 152.1, et seq., he is immune from tort liability. The Court agrees. … The GTCA provides immunity to a state employee, including an elected official, for conduct occurring in the scope of performing the duties of his office. Okla. Stat. tit. 51 § 153(B).

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.

Oklahoma County, Excise Board v. Kurn

189 Okla. 203 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 1, 1941

Clearly, sections 9 and 10 of art. 10 of the Constitution do not conflict with the provisions of section 26, art. 10, and both sections are intended for different purposes. Board of Education of Oklahoma City et al. v. … In deciding this question we must therefore call into aid the established rules we have heretofore adopted in construing constitutional provisions in general.

Gray v. State

4 Okla. Crim. 292 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 23, 1910

King, the regularly elected, qualified and acting judge for said district, then and there presiding and acting, wherein the case of the State of Oklahoma v. … Laws provides that the indictment is sufficient if “the act or omission charged as the offense is clearly and distinctly set forth in ordinary and concise language, without repetition, and in such a manner as to enable a

Channing v. Seneca-Cayuga Nation

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

Crow argued that, because these previously recognized tribal members “do not qualify to be members” of the Nation, “they do not qualify to vote” in the Secretarial election. (Id.) … When addressing sovereign immunity, however, Plaintiffs’ standing is neither here nor there.

Mailath v. State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Board of Bar Examiners

752 P.2d 803 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 1, 1988

Following a two-day inquiry the Board determined that Mailath failed to establish he was ethically fit to practice law. He now seeks relief from the Board’s post-hearing rejection. … and lastly 3) Is the applicant ethically qualified to seek bar admission by examination? To the first question we give an affirmative answer; to the second and third, a negative one.

Waldrop v. Discover Bank (In re Waldrop)

560 B.R. 806 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Nov 10, 2016

It is well settled that when a party withholds documents or any information based on the assertion of a privilege or work product immunity, “a party shall make the claim expressly and shall describe the nature of the documents … Such materials are clearly discoverable, and any argument to the contrary is simply beyond the pale.

Gayer v. Roddie

155 Okla. 27 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 2, 1932

All that may be conceded, but it does not qualify the right of the court appointing the receiver to have the estate administered by its receiver. … It does not follow that because leave is given to establish a claim, thereby leave is given to enforce it.

Opinion No. (2000)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jul 25, 2000

The United States Constitution prohibits governmental taking of property without due process of law: No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States … Invalidating the amendments, the Court of Appeals concluded that the homeowner association's attempt to amend the restrictive covenants within the ten-year period, and without the unanimous consent of the homeowners, clearly

Ply v. National Union Fire Insurance Co.

74 O.B.A.J. 3240 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 12, 2003

Clearly the truck did not contribute to his injuries. … Kansas City Fire and Marine Insurance Co., 1993 OK 32, ¶ 12 , 849 P.2d 407, 411 , and that a person qualifying as an insured is entitled to recover not only under his or her own UM policies but also under the UM endorsement

Rogers v. State

8 Okla. Crim. 226 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 26, 1912

Cr. 704 , 103 Pac. 535 , this court said: “When a defendant has been properly charged with an offense and fairly tried, and the evidence clearly establishes his guilt, this court will not reverse the conviction upon any technicality … Therefore this is clearly not a case of harmless error.

TXO Production Corp. v. Oklahoma Corp. Commission

829 P.2d 964 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 13, 1992

Under today’s construction, Oklahoma cannot maintain the status of rightful claimant to the funds in contest here as against those who may qualify under the Texas priority regime. … The Corporation Commission and the Tax Commission are to establish, administer and enforce rules and regulations and shall establish procedures for the full coordinated implementation of this act....” 27 .

Beavers v. Byers

239 P.3d 484 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 9, 2010

Byers has not argued any error with the trial court's "willful" or "fixture" determinations nor has he argued or cited legal authority that fixtures do not qualify as "property" under § 940(A). … On this record, we cannot say that the trial judge's decision was clearly erroneous or without a basis in reason or evidence.

Hodge v. Hodge

197 P.3d 511 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 12, 2008

I 2 On March 5, 2001, the trial court issued the first Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO). On November 9, 2005, it issued a Qualified Domestic Relations Order Nune Pro Tune and Military Division Pension Order. … Here, the consent decree clearly awards Wife 50% of Husband's military retirement, not limited to the extent the retirement funds were acquired during coverture.

Lee v. Swyden

319 P.2d 1009 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 24, 1957

Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co., 120 Okl. 182 , 250 P. 926 , that a stockholder of a corporation, which is the defendant in a personal injury action is not qualified to sit as a juror in the trial of such action, such ownership … must be clearly established.

Schrack v. State

84 Okla. Crim. 260 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · May 28, 1947

And we believe the law to be clearly settled there that if they refuse to testify, or testify falsely, they are to be tried themselves, and may be convicted on their own confession which was made after they were permitted … Having willfully refused to tes *274 tify against his accomplice, has he not forfeited the immunity which the state offered him upon that sole condition?

McClellan v. Board of County Commissioners

261 F.R.D. 595 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Oct 2, 2009

Such a clause would have clearly indicated that juvenile bureaus have capacity to sue and be sued. See, e.g., Okla. … In addition, Oklahoma law does not clearly designate a “chief executive officer” of a juvenile bureau.