Case law

Mayhue v. Mayhue

706 P.2d 890 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 17, 1985

post-decree proceeding 3 brought ten years later, the wife sought to enforce the alimony award against her former spouse and some members of his family by an accounting of the proceeds from the sale or transfer of certain qualifying … A failure to establish and recite the total value of the interest that was here the subject of an in-kind alimony award does not impair the facial validity of the award under consideration.

Hogan v. State

139 P.3d 907 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · May 15, 2006

The legislature repealed the Code of Criminal Procedure's privilege of spousal immunity four years later. … The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”

Gibbons v. Territory

5 Okla. Crim. 212 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 7, 1911

We think the cases quoted from and those cited clearly show that the indictment in this case should have been set aside. … instruction, the court obviously undertook to inform the jury under what state of facts they could find the defendant was lawfully at the premises and required that body to find that the three following propositions were established

Atkeson v. Sovereign Camp W. O. W.

90 Okla. 154 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 8, 1923

Atkeson and Mattie Atkeson established the relation of husband and wife unless such marriage is void by virtue of the provisions of the decree of divorce and sections 4971 and 4973 of Rev. … It was clearly the intention of our Legislature, in passing the divorce statute of this state, that when all the proceedings were completed, an absolute divorce should be effected.

Aguilar v. Clayton

452 F. Supp. 896 · District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Jun 27, 1978

motion to dismiss, defendants present four grounds for dismissal: (1) plaintiffs’ suit is barred by the statute of limitations; (2) plaintiffs have failed to join a necessary and indispensable party; (3) defendants are immune … The law itself also establishes the right for an employee to bring action in a U.S. district court . . ..” (emphasis added).

LANE v. PROGRESSIVE NORTHERN INSURANCE CO.

494 P.3d 345 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 29, 2021

; and "(2) Is there established and controlling law on the subject matter?" Barrios v. Haskell Cty. Pub. … s vehicle, qualified as Class 2 insureds under the Progressive policy. 1 As such, they also submitted claims for UM benefits to Progressive.

Frick Co. v. Oats

20 Okla. 473 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 12, 1908

Clearly these laws cannot be said to be adopted or re-enacted from anywhere but were already “in force.” … An acknowledged error must be more venerable and more inveterate than it can be made by any series of mere concessions or extrajudicial resolutions, or even by any single decision, before it can claim immunity upon the principles

Canadian River Land & Cattle Co. v. State ex rel. State Board of Agriculture

269 P.3d 40 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 13, 2011

T7 On appeal, Canadian River argues: (1) The transfer of the CAFO license in this matter denies Canadian River the right to due process especially when there is no authority establishing that a CAFO license runs with the … The rationale for this rule is that courts do not possess the specialized knowledge, training, experience or competency to substitute opinions for the judgment of qualified experts. Tulsa Area Hospital Council v.

Associated Industries of Oklahoma v. Industrial Welfare Commission

185 Okla. 177 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 21, 1939

clearly within the scope thereof. … There is nothing to indicate what that court -would deem arbitrary action or how this could be established in the absence of evidence or hearing.

National Railroad Passenger Corporation v. Harris

354 F. Supp. 887 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Dec 30, 1972

It has made no good faith effort to enforce this provision, its established policy having been to ignore it insofar as possible. … Article 5, § 57 of the Oklahoma Constitution provides: “Every act of the Legislature shall embrace but one subject, which shall be clearly expressed in its title * * *.

Bradford v. Territory Ex Rel. Woods

1 Okla. 366 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 20, 1893

The information is filed by the county attorney, and charges in substance that the appellant Bradford is the regularly elected, qualified and acting clerk of Oklahoma county. … I his principal is so well established that we deem it ^unnecessary to cite authorities.

Upchurch v. Wastequip, LLC

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Oct 18, 2021

Under the ADA Plaintiff must establish that he is “an individual with a disability.” … The Plaintiff bears the burden initially of establishing a prima facie case of discrimination: “(1) [he] is a member of a protected class by the [ADEA]; (2) [he] suffered an adverse employment action; (3) [he] was qualified

Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. v. West

38 Okla. 581 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Aug 6, 1913

The reply in effect denied each and every allegation in the answer contained, save as in the petition stated, or as thereinafter admitted, stated, or qualified, and alleged that, if the instruments mentioned in the answer … company, we would compel the widow to abandon the tenable theory upon which she brought the case, and to accept one less advantageous to her and her children, .and one which it would be difficult, if not impossible, to establish

Langston City v. Gustin

191 Okla. 93 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 23, 1942

The property involved in that case clearly fell within what we have herein denominated as class one under the statute. … But the rule itself is firmly established.

Hubbell v. Houston

441 P.2d 1010 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 6, 1967

We believe this clearly establishes that the nephew was not controlling the activities of the testator during this period. There was no evidence that Houston Hubbell ever used Mr. … The record clearly indicates that when the testator wanted something done Mr.

SHEPARD v. OKLAHOMA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

345 P.3d 377 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 24, 2015

independent medical examiner, as opposed to the medical reports of the other medical experts. 11 A comparison of § 14 and § 826 clearly shows a change in the substance of the law. 1 13 We must next determine whether the … Oklahoma Tax Commission, 2014 OK 31 , ¶ 10, 339 P.3d 848, 852 ("In considering a statute's constitutionality, courts are guided by well-established principles and a heavy burden is cast on those challenging a legislative

Ohio Casualty Ins. v. Callaway

45 F. Supp. 586 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jul 3, 1942

. *587 At the outset the court holds that it has jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter as diversity of citizenship clearly exists and the amount in controversy exceeds $3,000. … He felt that he was buying protection and security from one best qualified to sell it. He was lulled into a sense of security by the assurances of the insurance company’s agent.

Wright v. Kay County Justice Facilities Authority

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jan 21, 2021

“[A] motion for summary judgment should be granted only when the moving party has established the absence of any genuine issue as to a material fact.” Mustang Fuel Corp. v. … Thus, Defendants are entitled to judgment on them.3 Because Plaintiff cannot establish a constitutional violation, it is unnecessary to address Defendant Jones’ claim of qualified immunity.

Campbell v. Independent School District No. 01 of Okmulgee County

74 O.B.A.J. 2557 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 16, 2003

Plaintiff relies on the reimbursement clause of the Agreement, which he asserts clearly and unambiguously entitles him to be paid for all the sick leave he accumulated in excess of one hundred twenty (120) days. 4 12 Defendant … The retirement bank clause provides the general rule for the disposition of sick leave applicable to all teachers except those who qualify for participation in the reimbursement clause.

Coffee v. Henry

240 P.3d 1056 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 26, 2010

Edwards involved similar legislation, which at first glance did not appear to qualify as an appropriation. … Clearly both bills set aside dollars to be used for a specific purpose—each qualifying as an appropriation.