Case law

Tulsa County Budget Board v. Tulsa County Excise Board

74 O.B.A.J. 3318 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 2, 2003

Budget Board, County Commissioners and Assessor contend in the reply brief filed on May 22, 2003, that they have not argued that the Tax Commission's approval of the visual inspection plan makes the budget for that plan immune … When a special statute clearly includes the matter in controversy, the special statute controls over a statute of general applicability. Davis v.

In Re the Assessment for the Year 2000 of Certain Property Owned by Oneok Field Services Gathering, LLC

38 P.3d 900 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 28, 2001

Because they fall within the definition of real property, they cannot qualify as personal property under the terms of § 2807. 27 IV. … To be taxable, an interest in real property must fall within an established legislative classification.

GENTGES v. OKLAHOMA STATE ELECTION BOARD

319 P.3d 674 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 11, 2014

The important qualifying language in question is "before it becomes a law." … The complete text clearly indicates that presentment and veto consideration is required for "every bill" that "becomes law" through the Legislature's exercise of its granted sovereign power.

Burrows v. State

640 P.2d 533 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jan 20, 1982

And, I cannot say from reading the instructions as a whole that the jury clearly understood the appellant was not required to prove he did not intend to kill his wife. … In such cases not only the facts but the conclusions to which they lead, may be testified to by qualified experts. (Emphasis added).

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.

Hayes v. State

292 P.2d 442 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jan 11, 1956

The fact that defendant did have a work bench at the Williams 'Garage and that officer Lang did take a wrench from it, seems to have been clearly admitted. … And here was involved a charge of murder, where the jurors had been qualified for the assessment of the death penalty, and where the evidence outlined was wholly circumstantial.

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

Opinion No. (1997)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jun 30, 1997

Sanitary Reduction Works, 126 F. 29 , 32-40 (9th Cir. 1903), aff'd 199 U.S. 306 (1905). ¶ 9 Although the distinction between a franchise and contract for the provision of a public service is subtle and has not been clearly … It is well established in Oklahoma that municipalities act for the public health and discharge a governmental function in the collection and disposal of solid waste. City of Purcell v.

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.”

Derrick v. State ex rel. Department of Public Safety

164 P.3d 250 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jan 29, 2007

The performance of wet tests and the recording of test results is clearly within the regularly conducted business of a police department. - Justification for the public records and *253 reports exception is the assumption … copies of the [breathalyzer] operational checklist, of the approved methods filed by the state toxicologist with the clerk of district court, and of records showing that the device was approved and that the operator was qualified

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

Wixon v. State

527 P.2d 333 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 7, 1974

After being duly qualified as an expert, he testifed that the substance confiscated by Boston and Alcorn in their arrest of the defendant was marijuana. … The defendant’s next assignment of error alleges that the instructions given by the trial court were inadequate and erroneous in that they failed to clearly instruct the jury that the burden of proof rests upon the State

Hurley v. United States

10 F. Supp. 365 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Jan 14, 1935

Bender, but the court overlooked entirely the qualifying words “in place” twice used in that opinion. … Clearly in this case, too, no taxable gain arose, and it is not intimated that any taxable gain was returned by the associates.

Lively v. Ijam, Inc.

76 O.B.A.J. 1310 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Apr 19, 2005

However, because this is a small claims action, the record is sparse, and we cannot definitively determine if Lively qualifies as a merchant. … At one end of the scale is a defendant who clearly does business over the internet through a commercial website.

Plunkett v. Armor Correctional Health Services, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Mar 25, 2022

According to Defendants, Plaintiff cannot establish that the medical staff intentionally disregarded Mr. … It is not yet clear whether their alleged conduct best qualifies as medical malpractice or deliberate indifference—an exceedingly difficult line to draw in the first place.

Finstuen v. Edmondson

497 F. Supp. 2d 1295 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · May 19, 2006

The Supreme Court has, on numerous occasions, clearly established these parental rights are fundamental. Troxel v. … Supreme Court jurisprudence clearly establishes a fundamental right to travel. United States v.

Green v. Mee

197 Okla. 562 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 3, 1945

Green requested that Finley procure an appraisement from some competent party qualified to ascertain the value of the land. … Viewed as a whole we think the evidence clearly shows Harvey Lee received a commission of $1,500 from Robert Mee.

McCarty v. Weatherly

85 Okla. 123 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 17, 1922

They thus became qualified subscribing and attesting witnesses.” In Swift v. Wiley, 1 B. Mon. … But opportunity for undue influence, standing alone, is not sufficient to establish undue influence. From this record iit clearly appears to us that J. H.

Rice v. Theimer

45 Okla. 618 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 16, 1915

In the order of appointment it was recited that “it being first proven that notice of this hearing has been first given as required by law,” after which she duly qualified and gavé bond. … This is clearly a case for specific performance. The contract in writing between Elizabeth B. Theimer and Henry C.

Brown v. State Election Board of the Oklahoma

369 P.2d 140 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 13, 1962

It gives original jurisdiction to their Supreme Court to review the legislative apportionment in an action timely brought by a qualified elector. In Sec. 6(2) (c), of Art. … In an application for permission to file a second petition for rehearing in this case it is asserted that: “The apportionment acts under which legislative elections will be held * * * are clearly violative of the 14th amendment