Case law

Cummings v. State

69 O.B.A.J. 3979 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 10, 1998

We should apply the Strickland test, as established by the United States Supreme Court, in accordance with that Court's further delineation of its applicability. In Lockhart v. … Fretwell , the Court clearly stated a different outcome is not the legal criteria to use. ¶ 3 Secondly, I disagree with the notion that we cannot use Appellant's alleged rape of Melissa to support second stage aggravators

In Re the Oklahoma Capitol Improvement Authority

69 O.B.A.J. 1183 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 20, 1998

Court said: “Where a person or entity enters into a valid contract with the proper State officials and a valid appropriation has been made therefore, the State has consented to be sued and has waived its governmental immunity … The Legislature further declares that there exists a need to establish such minimal oversight to protect the public welfare of the State of Oklahoma.” .

State Ex Rel. Mothersead v. Dyer

126 Okla. 260 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 13, 1927

The absurdity of this contention may be clearly seen by re’membering that these attorneys took this note for the purpose of collection. … Plaintiff in his brief says also that the holding of the trial court in this case established the defendants as preferred creditors of the insolvent bank.

De Graff v. State

2 Okla. Crim. 519 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 29, 1909

The fact ought to have been established by testimony.” … No form of procedure is established in the Constitution as to how this shall be done in misdemeanors.

STATE v. NELSON

2015 OK CR 10 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 18, 2015

An abuse of discretion has been defined as "a clearly erroneous conclusion and judgment, one that is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts presented." Neloms v. … The right was judicially established in 1666 in the Hopkin Huggett's Case, 84 Eng. Rep. 1082 (K.B. 1666).

Laca v. United States

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Sep 16, 2024

The Court finds that it is not unjust to award expenses when a party participated in discovery despite any claims of immunity and that the Government has waived any objections based on that immunity. … its own sovereign immunity.

Croxton v. State

186 Okla. 249 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 21, 1939

They say that if these classes of owners are considered, the number consenting to 20-acre spacing, according to the evidence, clearly falls short of 80 per cent, of the total. … bond in the penal sum equaling said estimated cost, payable to the parties who shall have agreed to contribute to the cost of said well, as herein provided, duly signed by the principal and a responsible surety company qualified

Wisdom Ministries, Inc. v. Garrett

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Aug 1, 2023

Further, this clause prohibits states from clearly preferring one religious denomination over another. Trump v. Hawaii, 138 S. Ct. 2392, 2417 (2018). … However, Wisdom University is not accredited by approved agency and does not qualify for either exception. Id. at 10.

Reaves v. Reaves

15 Okla. 240 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 7, 1905

Haggin, 35 Nebraska, 375, it appears that the defendant took the plaintiff into the state of Kansas, before a person who pretended to be but was not a qualified clergyman, and had a fraudulent ceremony of marriage performed … But a different rule was established for the future by that council. in their decree of Novvember 11th, 1563.

Opinion No. (2001)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Nov 8, 2001

"This is a very fine provision of the law, and affords an opportunity to petitioner and all others who are confined in the penal institutions of this state to present their cases to an eminently qualified board for proper … Adoption Of Minimum Mandatory Confinement Period Prior To Parole Consideration ¶ 6 As originally adopted, the constitutional amendment establishing the Pardon and Parole Board did not authorize the Legislature to establish

Haddox v. Central Freightlines, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Sep 25, 2025

Regardless, Plaintiffs argue that any testimony about this exercise should be precluded because it does not qualify as “expert” testimony and would confuse and mislead the jury. … Therefore, the Plaintiff has not established that the evidence is unfairly prejudicial or otherwise “clearly inadmissible on all potential grounds.” Mendelsohn, 587 F.Supp.2d at 1208. III.

Higbee v. Owens

155 Okla. 93 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 22, 1931

The defendant does cite cases holding that the burden is upon a plaintiff to prove that a communication made upon an occasion of qualified or conditional privilege is malicious, but those cases hold to the common-law rule … If the testimony established that the defamatory matter was bona fide believed to be true from reasonable cause and the occasion was employed from a proper motive, then the publication was privileged, and such privilege afforded

Bechtel v. State

63 O.B.A.J. 2499 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 2, 1992

The defendant must offer evidence which establishes herself as a “battered woman.” 2. … The expert must establish herself/himself as one who is qualified by knowledge, skill, experience, training or education to diagnose the defendant as suffering from the Battered Woman Syndrome. 3.

Folts v. Grady County Board of County Commissioners

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Mar 31, 2021

Folts’s conditions-of-confinement claim, arguing that the official capacity claims were tantamount to claims against Grady County and that they were entitled to qualified immunity on the individual capacity claims. … Id. at 9 (noting that the Court previously granted qualified immunity to Gerlach). 3 As both Mr. Folts and Judge Erwin point out, the sanitation policy attached to the Municipal Defendants’ Motion [Doc.

Stephen v. Stephen

68 O.B.A.J. 1456 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 22, 1997

We find the evidence does not establish that Lynn Martin's home schooling of her two boys adversely affected their best interests. … Clearly, there was evidence to support the trial court's ruling. The record shows that the children were bright, but were being slowed by the teacher.

Fields v. Volkswagen of America, Inc.

555 P.2d 48 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 27, 1976

Where plaintiff’s theory does not depend upon the defect described in the letter the recall evidence is clearly irrelevant. … The Texas court recog *61 nized the great latitude allowed counsel in discussing evidence and issues but qualified the privilege by saying that he must remain within the record.

Hoog v. Dometic Corporation

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Mar 22, 2024

In the field of fire cause and origin investigations, it is well established that reliance on the expertise of others is standard industry practice. See, e.g., United States v. … Despite this focus, “an expert’s conclusions are not immune from scrutiny.” Dodge, 328 F.3d at 1222.

Hopper v. Tulsa County

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Sep 30, 2025

immunity. … Second, the Court addresses whether Hopper alleges any plausible individual capacity claims against any defendant and, if so, whether any defendant is entitled to qualified immunity.

In Re Initiative Petition No. 27 of Oklahoma City

74 O.B.A.J. 3490 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 9, 2003

Merrill, supra, that clearly hold otherwise. … A protest filed by anyone, if abandoned by the party filing it, may be revived within five (5) days by any other qualified elector.

Clarke v. Bank of Commerce

506 F. Supp. 2d 851 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Mar 30, 2007

Defendant argues that the facts fail to establish a hostile work environment claim. … Here, plaintiffs are both members of a protected class, and there is no dispute that they were qualified for their positions at the Bank.