Case law

Looney v. County Election Board of Seminole County

145 Okla. 25 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 9, 1930

Clearly the duties of that board under that section were purely ministerial. Section 3038, R. L. 1910, was carried forward without change and appears as section 6107, C. O. S. 1921. In Brown v. … To permit such would be to defeat the rights of qualified electors by the acts of individuals over which they have no control.

Ellis v. Grimes

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Aug 18, 2022

immunity. … Bray and Shoemaker both argued they are entitled to summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. Bray MSJ at 21–24; Shoemaker MSJ at 22–25.

Pikas v. Williams Companies, Inc.

903 F. Supp. 2d 1219 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Oct 19, 2012

At the administrative level, Pikas did not clearly raise the argument that the Plan itself required the COLA be provided to lump sum beneficiaries. … Remedies need be established in a separate proceeding, as discussed above.

State ex rel. Board of Regents ex rel. Campus Disciplinary Council v. Lucas

297 P.3d 378 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 5, 2013

The Student Alcohol Policy also states that: 'To qualify for a deferral and ultimate removal of the first strike, a student must not receive any other alcohol offense for a period of twelve months ... … No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor

Question Submitted by: Secretary Terry Cline, Ph.D., Secretary of Health and Human Services

2017 OK AG 5 · Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jun 13, 2017

specific words; (2) the members of the enumeration constitute a class; (3) the class is not exhausted by the enumeration; (4) a general reference supplementing the enumeration, usually following it; and (5) there is not clearly … Public Health and Safety Cite Name Level 63 O.S. 1 -1939, Liability to Residents - Injunctive and Declaratory Relief - Damages - Waiver of Rights - Jury Trial - Retaliation Against Residents - Immunity - Report of Abuse or

IN RE: INITIATIVE PETITION No. 420 STATE QUESTION No. 804

2020 OK 9 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 4, 2020

The Oklahoma Statutes currently provide for the establishment of congressional districts. … Qualified electors are authorized to seek review in the Oklahoma Supreme Court of any apportionment order made by the Commission.

Flores v. State

66 O.B.A.J. 2161 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 27, 1995

Most any person qualified to sit on a jury in this country is familiar with the phrase that a criminal defendant is “presumed innocent until proven guilty.” … Our message to the prosecution is that it should join with the defense in objecting to a clearly erroneous instruction.

Daniels v. State

554 P.2d 88 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Aug 13, 1976

The testimony of Lee Ann Hicks established the fact that agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation made an intensive inquiry into the attempted robbery of the bank. … She again saw and observed a CU prefix on the license plate and the dent in the car and identified the car clearly and unequivocally as one and the same used in the attempted armed robbery.

Michael F. v. State ex rel. Department of Human Services

61 O.B.A.J. 2374 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 18, 1990

However, it is equally well established that this right can be surrendered by voluntary consent or waiver. Id.; Seymour v. Swart, 695 P.2d 509, 511 (Okla.1985). On November 13, 1987, Mr. … County Election Bd., 326 P.2d 782 (Okla.1958), we were called upon to consider whether 19 O.S.1951, § 132, which re *708 quires county officers to be qualified voters, and Art.

Hill v. Independent School District No. 25 of Adair County

73 O.B.A.J. 3062 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 6, 2002

Furthermore, where a career teacher’s misconduct qualifies both as willful neglect of duty (which typically requires admonishment) and as moral turpitude (which does not), it was surely not the intention of the legislature … Her conduct clearly fits the definition of moral turpitude. That conduct was also irremediable; the damage already done.

City of Tulsa v. McIntosh

141 Okla. 220 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 11, 1930

The distinction was clearly pointed out in the recent case of Relyea v. Pulp Co., 102 Wis. 301 , 78 N. W. 412 .” … City of Fond du Lac, supra, even in case the right of action were wholly statutory, is not material for determination of the question here as one of first instance, for the reason that the doctrine is now firmly established

Choate v. Lawyers Title Insurance Corp.

385 P.3d 670 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 11, 2015

not qualify for coverage under section (2) or (3) of the Title Policy. … It remains in full force unless it is clearly and expressly modified or abrogated by [Oklahoma] constitution or by statute.”)

Wells v. Territory of Oklahoma

14 Okla. 436 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 3, 1904

Watson, a witness on behalf of the Territory, after having fully qualified as a medical expert, who as coroner had made a careful examination of the body of the deceased and the surroundings shortly after the homicide, after … Watson, as above, the plaintiff in error contends was permitting the witness to establish by his oath an important controverted fact in the case, and one that was not the subject of expert testimony, and which was purely

Hayes v. Chaparral Energy, LLC

180 F. Supp. 3d 902 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Mar 29, 2016

Statutory Framework “In 1872, Congress established a reservation for the Osage Nation in present day Oklahoma.” Osage Nation v. … “The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) is tasked with interpreting NEPA and establishing regulations governing agencies’ responsibilities under the statute.” Sierra Club, Inc. v.

RCB BANK v. STITT

2026 OK 49 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 16, 2026

COCA clearly decided that the statute of limitations was not tolled. … Kent Stitt appealed, clearly preserving the tolling issue.

Seattle-First National Bank v. Federal Deposit Insurance

619 F. Supp. 1351 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Oct 15, 1985

According to this theory, the offset amounts constituted a “separate fund” augmenting the Receiver’s estate, thereby qualifying for preferred receivership distributions. … A claimant seeking to establish a preference in its favor under federal law “has a heavy burden of proof,” and “unless he clearly and certainly identifies” a specific fund or payment in the Receiver’s possession, cognizable

Graham v. D & K Oilfield Services, Inc.

404 P.3d 863 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 19, 2017

Clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, material, probative and substantial competent evidence; 6. Arbitrary or capricious; 7. Procured by fraud; or 8. … Prior decisions of this Court, however, do not support Graham’s assertions. ¶ 29 Early in the twentieth century, this Court established that Okla. Const, art. 2, 6 was meant to serve as a limitation on the judiciary.

Price v. Driscoll

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Jul 8, 2025

Plaintiff’s proposed Second Amended Complaint now clearly identifies his age, but refers to the ages and genders of others in generalized terms, e.g., “female 50+,” “male age 40+,” “female 30+,” and “female 20+.” … Further, it is not disputed that Plaintiff applied for a position for which he was qualified.

Maddox v. State

12 Okla. Crim. 462 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 18, 1916

“The presumption of law is that a defendant can get a fair and impartial trial in the county in which the offense was committed, and, if this is not true, the burden is upon the defendant who seeks a change of venue to establish … Judge Collier, having duly qualified as Special Judge, the case was submitted upon oral argument and briefs by both parties;

STATE ex rel. OKLAHOMA BAR ASSOCIATION v. GREEN

465 P.3d 1197 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 28, 2020

¶21 In Count I, as the facts show, Respondent's actions clearly show that he was in violation of professional responsibility rules, specifically those relating to Competence, Diligence and Communication during his representation … Giger II explains it this way: Emotional or psychological disability may serve to reduce a legal practitioner's ethical culpability, but does not immunize that person from imposition of disciplinary measures that are necessary