Case law

Alexander v. Taylor

51 P.3d 1204 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 27, 2002

Defendants-Appellants were sued in their official capacities. 1 ¶ 2 Appellees alleged in their amended petition, filed February 21, 2002, that the Oklahoma Legislature had not yet adopted a redistricting plan and that the qualifying … As the trial court’s judgment is not clearly contrary to the weight of the evidence, it is entitled to a presumption of correctness and must be affirmed.

State Ex Rel. State Insurance Fund v. Great Plains Care Center, Inc.

74 O.B.A.J. 2753 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 30, 2003

This legislative enactment expressly grants authority for attorney's fees to be awarded against a state entity, and sovereign immunity issues are not implicated. See Vanderpool v. … An abuse of judicial discretion occurs when a trial court's order is exercised to an end or purpose not justified by, and clearly against, reason and evidence. Christian v.

Oklahoma State Election Board v. Coats

610 P.2d 776 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 21, 1980

The general rule is that when the constitution establishes specific eligibility requirements for a particular constitutional office, the constitutional criteria are exclusive. … 7 The appellants’ position is that the statute is constitutional because: all district attorneys in like circumstances are treated equally; and the burden is on the appellee to show that it is essentially arbitrary and clearly

Board of County Commisioners v. City of Muskogee

62 O.B.A.J. 3429 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 5, 1991

The enactment’s express terms clearly indicate that the recipients of ad valorem tax revenues, and not the county assessor, are the direct beneficiaries of the revaluation program. … Const., which establishes the State Board of Equalization and defines its functions — to adjust and equalize the valuation of real and personal property; [b] 68 O.S.Supp.1985 §§ 2463 and 2464, which establish the identity

Hildebrand v. Gray

65 O.B.A.J. 136 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 23, 1993

However, the scope of who qualify as “privies” varies according to the circumstances of the particular ease. … Clearly, there is in this case a “conflict of interest” as defined in § 58(2): Appel-lees could have pressed a claim against Gray for either intentional assault and/or battery, or negligence.

SMITH v. SHELTER MUTUAL INSURANCE CO.

325 P.3d 26 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 31, 2013

Smith further alleged the truck is subject to the *28 MCA, and sought a "declaratory judgment . establishing that the minimum limits of liability insurance coverage mandated by the financial responsibility law that applies … from public schools or to and from public-school-related extracurricular activities under contract with, and sponsored by, a public school board; provided, that motor vehicles and equipment operated for the purposes shall qualify

Owens v. Lynch

147 Okla. 298 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 17, 1931

Roddie as his successor, who qualified as such on the same day. … The record clearly shows there was no valid consideration for the release, and for this reason it could not stand against the motion.

Green Bay Packaging v. Preferred Packaging, Inc.

932 P.2d 1091 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 11, 1996

In addition, the same evidence was presented to establish damages without regard to whether the damages were caused by interference or by defamation. … “To reverse a trial court under abuse of discretion, it must be found that the trial judge made a clearly erroneous conclusion and judgment, against reason and evidence.” Broadwater v.

Caplinger v. Medtronic, Inc.

921 F. Supp. 2d 1206 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Feb 6, 2013

Defendants further assert that plaintiffs off-label promotion allegations do not immunize plaintiffs claims from express preemption under § 360k(a). … While plaintiff couches her claim as a state law negligence claim, this claim is, in substance, a claim for violating the FDCA and, thus, is clearly preempted under Buckman and § 337(a).

City of Tulsa v. Langley

196 Okla. 680 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 16, 1946

In February of 1922 the $6,800,000 bond issue previously mentioned was approved by the qualified voters of the city of Tulsa. … such that the funds derived from its operation are directly or indirectly connected with taxation (except perhaps when the transaction involved is clearly severable and is also self-liquidating).

Robinson v. State

255 P.3d 425 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Apr 21, 2011

T7 This Court has not always clearly related the standard under which it reviewed erroneous denial of peremptory challenges. … The error in Golden was egregious and clearly required relief.

IN THE MATTER OF THE REINSTATEMENT OF GOFORTH

2019 OK 1 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 23, 2019

We held, she had shown her competence and learning in the law to qualify her for readmission without retaking the bar examination. Id. ¶12. … The Petitioner's continuing legal education equivalency clearly exceeds the annually required twelve hours for licensed lawyers in Oklahoma.

Deason v. State

576 P.2d 778 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 28, 1978

John Weiser was called and qualified by the defense as an expert in the field of handguns. … He contends that this clearly means that he must serve his entire term in the State penitentiary at McAlester.

Hice v. Turn Key Health Clinics LLC

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Sep 3, 2024

For the first element, the Estate alleges Turn Key has an established custom of not testing inmates for COVID-19, even when a test is clearly required, in order to avoid the significant costs of outside medical treatment … Thus, the Court determines that the Estate’s allegations do not conclusively establish that Turn Key is entitled to immunity under the OGTCA.

Haskew v. Knights of Modern MacCabees

58 Okla. 294 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 25, 1916

The other stipulations regarding the furnishing of proofs of death are as follows: “It is hereby agreed and stipulated that Beulah Curington has duly qualified and made the bond required by law, and had letters of guardianship … The court’s ruling in favor of the defendant ie clearly based upon the following condition of the by-laws: “Sec. 60.

Reed v. Smith & Nephew, Inc.

527 F. Supp. 2d 1336 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Nov 7, 2007

Plaintiffs have established that Coleman is qualified to testify as to his opinion that the device failed due to internal structural flaws and regarding the basis for that opinion. b. … Defendant has offered no substantial justification for failing to disclose Lemons and his testimony, and Plaintiffs clearly would be harmed by this unforeseen critique of their expert witness.

Bishop v. Takata Corp.

12 P.3d 459 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 26, 2000

The amicus curiae insists that the purpose of the statute was to prevent people from being punished for failure to wear a seat belt, not to grant immunity to the manufacturer for the failure to install working seat belts. … The Department shall establish specifications and requirements for approved types of safety belts and safety shoulder harnesses and attachments thereto.

Davidson v. Gregory

780 P.2d 679 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 5, 1989

Because noncompliance with Rule 10 is not apparent from the sparse record before us, we are again constrained to assume that all the elements necessary to qualify for the Rule 10 exception were met. … IV REQUIREMENTS FOR ESTABLISHING WANT OF RULE 10 NOTICE AS A GROUND FOR VACATION A party seeking a judgment’s vacation clearly bears the burden to bring a case within the parameters of § 1031 relief. 16 It is the vacation

Johnson v. Johnson

319 P.2d 1107 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 24, 1957

In our opinion the trial court was clearly justified and, indeed, compelled to hold defendant in contempt. … The evidence established that at the time of the trial the defendant had no funds with which to pay such amount.

Matter of Adoption of Baby Boy D

742 P.2d 1059 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 12, 1985

Subsection (e) declares: “No foster care placement may be ordered in such proceeding in the absence of a determination, supported by clear and convincing evidence, including testimony of qualified expert witnesses, that the … interest to the mother’s. 37 The court noted that the argument posed by the general unavailability of unwed fathers did not apply to Caban because fathers like Caban with substantial relationships with their children are clearly