Case law

Greenberg v. Wolfberg

890 P.2d 895 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 3, 1995

ascertain (1) the nature of the right the litigant seeks to assert and (2) when the plaintiff could have first maintained the cause advanced to a successful result. 43 Generally, the one-year time bar is set in motion by each qualified … If this inquiry establishes that counsel’s advice was relied upon by the plaintiff in bringing the component actions, it is a complete defense to malicious prosecution. Page v.

Wentz v. Thomas

159 Okla. 124 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 23, 1932

S. 1981, secs. 10072-10973] and by his acceptance of the appointment, his having duly qualified for the¡ office and his. entrance upon the duties thereof. … The proviso, by the law, established the exception by which his right and title to the office may not exist.

Woodruff v. Phillips

138 Okla. 77 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 10, 1929

possess the skill to detect unfitness, or the opportunities to do so, the *82 law may require diligence upon the part of the master; but where the appliance is a common tool, of which the man who uses it is necessarily well qualified … The court based its opinion upon two propositions: The first, that he was inexperienced, and this clearly appears ; and, second, that the employee was not in such condition as to appreciate his danger and properly exercise

Underwood v. State

252 P.3d 221 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 25, 2011

Yet, as mentioned, Appellant concedes that the evidence establishes conscious physical suffering before death. … Arizona, which clearly contemplate that a suspect in custody, having invoked his right to silence, may thereafter change his mind. .

Ibarra v. Lee

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

Ibarra are not clearly relevant but are also not clearly irrelevant. Dkt. 66-5. … Defend- ants argue that “the clearly established law in the Tenth Circuit holds that the Fourth Amendment does not require an officer to use the least or a less force- ful alternative” in an altercation. Mata v.

Oklahoma Company v. O'NEIL

333 P.2d 534 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 2, 1958

Fraud is never presumed but must be affirmatively proven, and all of its elements must be established, the absence of any one of them being fatal. … Westcott and his wife own all the stock in this company except one qualifying share. Westcott was an experienced oil man of the promoter type.

In Re Oklahoma Uniform Jury Instructions for Juvenile Cases

116 P.3d 119 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 28, 2005

It does not include an unwed father where paternity has not been acknowledged or established.” … It does not include an unwed father where paternity has not been acknowledged or established.”

United States v. Norton

188 F. 256 · District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Jun 5, 1911

In such case it is well established that the various successive acts may be charged in one count. … They do not, therefore, of themselves fully and clearly set forth every element of the offense charged.

Sutton v. Kiefer Public Schools

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Dec 2, 2022

Plaintiff’s failure to establish the boy’s conduct as gender-oriented or motivated is sufficient to dismiss Plaintiff’s Title IX claim because she has failed to establish that the conduct complained of was “ … for purposes of immunity under Okla.

Patterson v. Stanolind Oil & Gas Co.

182 Okla. 155 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 1, 1938

In the Marrs Case, the Circuit Court of Appeals upheld as denying none of the rights, privileges, and immunities guaranteed by the federal Constitution, a Kansas City ordinance which provided for a distribution among the … As we view it the property here involved has not been taken or confiscated; its use has merely been restricted and qualified. This does not violate the due process clause of either Constitution.

St. Louis S. F. Ry. Co. v. Richards

23 Okla. 256 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 23, 1909

The law will not give effect to a stipulation, if fraudulently entered into, that would grant immunity to iniquity and fraud. 9 Cyc. 474. … When reason returns to the injured, and the harm inflicted is discovered, then the asserted wrong, whether true or not, done at. the settlement, is made clearly apparent.

Stratton v. Sutherland Global Services, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Feb 10, 2020

On February 22nd, Sutherland offered Plaintiff Ryan Stratton a job as the Senior Accountant working in the group established to handle Motiva’s fixed- asset accounting. … Although Stratton clearly had some contact with the agency around that time, the law requires more than merely opening a case file.

Hunt v. Democratic Party of Oklahoma

439 F. Supp. 788 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Nov 6, 1977

But there, unlike here, the Election Law of the state prescribed the manner in which state and county party committees are to be established and further provided that the county committee should consist of two members elected … It follows that the case is clearly distinguishable from the case at hand.” The Todd v.

In Re Starkey

179 B.R. 687 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Feb 21, 1995

F.R.B.P. 2002(a)(5) clearly contemplates that conversions are not to be handled ex parte. … Todd’s continued use of “notices,” and his insistence on immediate conversion, are clearly in error. Finally, Todd argues a Constitutional aspect.

Bean v. Rumrill

69 Okla. 300 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 5, 1918

This agency is so well established that it is not likely that the same could be satisfactorily disproved. … However, the note made to the defendant being usurious on its face, the plaintiffs clearly are entitled to have judgment rendered for twice the usurious interest paid on that particular note, without regard to the question

Mengert v. United States

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · May 2, 2023

. # 11) arguing that it had not waived sovereign immunity from plaintiff’s claims and the Court lacked jurisdiction over this case. … For the purpose of plaintiff’s proposed negligence claim, it does not matter whether the TSA’s screener’s failure to intervene was intentional or merely careless, and plaintiff was clearly aware of the TSA screener’s failure

Nickell v. Department of Human Services

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Apr 10, 2020

Plaintiff seeks to add jurisdiction and venue allegations, which is not necessary, as federal jurisdiction was established in the Notice of Removal premised on Plaintiff’s constitutional claims. … Clearly given Ms. 5 To the extent Plaintiff seeks declaratory relief his claims would similarly fail.

Mulinix v. Sartin

164 P.3d 137 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 26, 2007

Holly "shall have all the rights, duties, powers, and controls over his person except as modified or qualified by the limited guardianship." T4 In the summer of 2006, Mr. … STANDARD OF REVIEW % We will reverse a guardianship order only if it is clearly against the weight of the evidence or contrary to law. Gould v. Smith, 1965 OK 112, ¶ 0 , 405 P.2d 82, 83 (syl. 2 by the Court).

Kierl-Allen v. Salvation Army Arkansas Oklahoma Division

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Sep 30, 2021

This evaluation qualified her for a merit raise. … Plaintiff’s claim clearly meets the first two elements, and TSA appears to concede that it meets the third. [Doc. No. 56 at p. 28].

State Ex Rel. Williamson v. Empire Oil Corp.

353 P.2d 130 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 7, 1960

The title of this Act, House Bill No. 20, was: "An Act providing a revision of the corporation laws of the State of Oklahoma; establishing a business corporation code; and repealing Sections" (previous statutes governing … Under no theory do I find this section to be in conflict with Sec. 111, as this section clearly indicates that the legislature intended that the fee provision of Sec. 111, supra, be continued in force.