Case law

State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Haave

290 P.3d 747 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 6, 2012

Groshon, 2003 OK 112 , 82 P.3d 99 [The record established that the female client hired the attorney to handle her divorce action. … His procedures for monitoring unfiled cases were clearly inadequate.] State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v.

Miami Business Services, LLC v. Davis

299 P.3d 477 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 2, 2013

T6 In response to this Court's show cause order, Miami argued that: 1) the order affected a substantial part of the merits of the case and thus qualified as a final order under 12 0.8.2011 $ 953; 4 2) that statutes granting … sought did in fact impact the cause. 1 16 It makes no sense to waste the time and money of the judiciary and the litigants on protracted litigation when the irreparable harm caused by not disqualifying counsel for a party is clearly

JOHNSON v. BROWN

2024 OK CIV APP 18 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 27, 2024

The Stock Restriction Agreement, adopted in December of 1990, clearly states that the shareholders only included the Original Shareholders. … For example, in In re Osteopathic Hospital Association of Delaware 195 A.2d 759, 762 (Del. 1963), the Court explained that Delaware "courts have long held that bylaws may be amended or established by custom or by acquiescence

Dowell v. Board of Education of the Oklahoma City Public Schools, Independent District No. 89

677 F. Supp. 1503 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Dec 9, 1987

A census tract map of the Oklahoma City metropolitan area for 1960 clearly shows the historical concentration of black households in the east inner-city area. (Def. Ex. 2; Tr. 45). … The decisions of the Court of Appeals establishing these guidelines all point to one primary source of authority — the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v.

Handy v. City of Lawton

63 O.B.A.J. 2309 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 14, 1992

I would require the trial court to hold an adversary eviden-tiary hearing and then rule on whether the medical payments in contest are Handy’s own money or will qualify for credit on the judgment. … The payment is thus made from a “collateral source” — i.e., from a fund clearly separate from general government revenue.

Robinson

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Mar 20, 2026

LLC, the court dismissed plaintiff's negligence claim against Turn Key because “Turn Key, an independent contractor employing licensed medical processionals for the jail, is an employee of the state and thus entitled to qualified … immunity under the [O]GTCA.” 2025 WL 1885637, at *7.

Lutheran Benevolent Insurance v. National Catholic Risk Retention Group, Inc.

939 F. Supp. 1506 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Aug 14, 1995

Celotex, the Supreme Court stated: [t]he plain language of Rule 56(c) mandates the entry of summary judgment, after adequate time for discovery and upon motion, against a party who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish … The Court finds that, based on the plain meaning of the language of the instant policy, the definition of an “occurrence” clearly was intended to encompass most claims for ordinary negligence.

In Re BMW Group I, Ltd.

168 B.R. 731 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Oklahoma · May 27, 1994

If the evidence is credible, the court cannot confirm the sale for less than the newly-established fair market price. … Such a process clearly violates both the principles of purchase and the Code requirements.

STATE ex rel. OKLAHOMA BAR ASSOCIATION v. WARD and STATE ex rel. OKLAHOMA BAR ASSOCIATION v. STARR

2015 OK 48 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 23, 2015

treatment in pending or potential criminal cases in exchange for testimony in this case and any and all consideration or promises of consideration given to any witness by the State or its attorney, including but not limited to immunity … Pippin in the murder created a serious risk with respect to his client's involvement. 59 ¶50 Our record clearly reveals that appellate counsel for Mr.

Fletcher v. United States

153 F. Supp. 3d 1354 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Dec 30, 2015

Determining the Relevant Account Fletcher II clearly dictates that plaintiffs are entitled to an accounting. … Here, joinder of the Osage Nation is not feasible because the Nation possesses sovereign immunity. See id.

State Ex Rel. Wright v. Oklahoma Corp. Commission

170 P.3d 1024 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 3, 2007

We address both petitions for certiorari in the order presented by Phillips. 117 A gui tom request is one brought under a statute that establishes a penalty for the commission or omission of a certain act and provides that … Clearly, a declaratory judgment proceeding brought by officials in response to a demand letter is one of many procedurally appropriate responses. Tal II, supra.

Braver v. Northstar Alarm Services LLC

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jul 16, 2019

In or around February of 2016, NorthStar hired Yodel to generate qualified leads for NorthStar. … These facts are established on this record.

Hulsey v. Mid-America Preferred Insurance Co.

777 P.2d 932 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 11, 1989

The statutory language, above, clearly mandates UM protection for an insured and such protection is not conditioned upon a wrongdoer's state of mind. … Chamberlin, Okl., 720 P.2d 721, 723 [1986]), the appearance docket may serve in an appellate tribunal as an authoritative source for identifying the instruments the court clerk has filed in the case or for establishing any

Emrit v. Musk

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Mar 4, 2025

with business relations/contracts” and violated: the Civil Rights Act of 1964; the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution; the Privileges and Immunities … Due process requires that a defendant 9 “purposefully established minimum contracts within the forum State” and that “the assertion of personal jurisdiction

Sabine Corp. v. ONG Western, Inc.

725 F. Supp. 1157 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Aug 9, 1989

their wells’ status qualifying them for Priority One, Two or Three. … To qualify, the applicant must show extreme, not merely unreasonable expense.

Stephenson Oil Co. v. Citgo Petroleum Corp.

271 F.R.D. 323 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Sep 14, 2010

This argument by Stephenson requires speculation and cannot be used to establish injury. … a clearly erroneous fact).

Rodgers v. Beechcraft Corp.

248 F. Supp. 3d 1158 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Mar 29, 2017

Caves was clearly aware of this fact, because he aborted his first landing attempt after being advised by ATC that his main landing gear had not deployed. … Plaintiffs have no admissible evidence establishing that the alternate landing gear was defectively designed.

Reneau

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Aug 14, 2026

Background This action arises from a dispute over whether benefits are due under a qualified long-term care insurance policy. … implied-in-law duty to act in good faith and deal fairly with the insured to ensure that the policy benefits are received.’”33 However, “[t]he tort of bad faith does not foreclose the insurer’s right to deny a claim; an insurer clearly

Panhandle Eastern Pipeline Company LP v. Tarralbo

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Feb 8, 2022

Section 717f(h) appears to provide identical requirements to establish the Court’s subject-matter jurisdiction and for Plaintiff to obtain substantive relief. … Regardless, if Plaintiff satisfies the 717f(h) requirements, the Court clearly has subject-matter jurisdiction.

Sharp Ex Rel. Commercial Financial Services, Inc. v. Chase Manhattan Bank USA, N.A. (In Re Commercial Financial Services, Inc.)

350 B.R. 520 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Sep 14, 2005

However, an expert’s conclusions are not immune from scrutiny: “A court may conclude that there is simply too great an analytical gap between the data and the opinion proffered.” General Elec. Co. v. … Eggleston lacks the legal expertise to interpret contracts and therefore is not qualified to assign values to CFS’s and NGU’s contractual assets and liabilities. Motion at 14. Ms.