Case law

Brownfield

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Apr 1, 2026

Comments reflecting “personal bias do not qualify as direct evidence of discrimination unless the plaintiff shows the speaker had decisionmaking authority and acted on his or her discriminatory beliefs.” … These admissions are not contrary to the facts of the case, nor do they establish Plaintiff’s entitlement to summary judgment.

Moore v. Amazon.Com Inc

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Dec 27, 2022

Thus, they argue, Samsung has purposefully availed itself of Oklahoma’s market because it “deliberately uses its shared brand identity with other companies that very clearly target and serve the Oklahoma market.” … Samsung notes that its interaction with the battery “ends at the point of sale from [it] to the particular sophisticated, qualified customer.” Def.’s Decl. [Doc. No. 52] at 5.

Turner v. XL Specialty Insurance Company

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jun 30, 2020

Turner does not qualify for coverage under Section I(A) of the policy as he did not suffer a covered “Loss”. … Turner was nominally pleaded as a “defendant” in the Mueller lawsuit, the pleadings demonstrate clearly that he stood in the same posture as Mr.

Juarez v. Social Security Administration

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Mar 31, 2024

Standard of Review The Social Security Act (the Act) provides disability insurance benefits to qualifying individuals who have a physical or mental disability. … some instances, a controlling issue, every effort must be made to secure evidence that resolves the issue as clearly and explicitly as circumstances permit.”).° V.

Sitsler v. Buss

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Jun 13, 2025

Sitsler alleges that the holdings of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals (“OCCA”) were in error and/or contrary to clearly established Federal law. See id. … Respondent argues, Sitsler’s Application does not qualify as a tolling motion under § 2244(d)(2) because it was not properly filed. Dkt. No. 20 at 9-15. The Court agrees with Respondent.

State Farm Fire and Casualty Company v. Aberdeen Enterprizes, II, Inc.

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Aug 6, 2020

As a result of the Underlying Action, certain Underlying Defendants made demand on State Farm for defense and immunity under the Policies. … “Once the insured establishes coverage, ‘the insurer has the burden of showing that a loss falls within an exclusionary clause of the policy.’” Id. (quoting Pitman v.

Thomas v. Metropolitan Life Insurance

540 F. Supp. 2d 1212 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jan 10, 2008

and foresight to make, or at least consider making, some provision for the financial benefit of their survivors or for their own financial security in retirement — is arguably enough smaller than the citizenry at large to qualify … Id. 19 Established rules of statutory construction are then applied to resolve any ambiguity. Id.

Jackson v. State

146 P.3d 1149 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 2, 2006

We defer to the trial court's ruling on these issues unless it is clearly erroncous. See Matthews v. … Manning, 672 P.2d 499, 510-12 (Colo.1983)(en banc) because the facts of that case did not qualify. . The Illinois court stated in People v.

Jenkins v. State

80 Okla. Crim. 328 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 2, 1945

Lawrence Jones of Bristow, who having duly qualified as Special Judge, did so participate in the hearing of this case. … established according to the forms and rules of law, prescribed for ascertaining his guilt.

Yazel v. William K. Warren Medical Research Center, Inc.

364 P.3d 1281 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 24, 2014

They also insist that use of the word "duty" in 19 0.8.2011 § 527 unambiguously and clearly means that only the district attorney or counsel from the Oklahoma Tax Commission may represent the assessor in a proceeding such … To operate a continuum of care facility do not encompass independent living apartments and cottages, do such areas of Respondents’ property qualify for an exemption under §- 2887(8)(b)(l)? 5.

State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. O'Bryan

385 P.2d 876 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 18, 1963

established that the March 24, 1958, claim and May 21, 1958, amendment thereto were fraudulent; found Mr. … That it embraces many cases in which the offense is indictable is established by an overwhelming weight of authority.

Natural Gas Pipe Line Co. of America v. Panoma Corp.

271 P.2d 354 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 15, 1953

The contention urged by appellant that a group of private producers and royalty owners derive substantial gain from the regulations does not contradict the established connection between the orders and a state-wide interest … Such action on its part is clearly a violation of the due process clause of both the federal and state Constitutions. The producer cannot "have his cake and eat it too."

Cerna

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jun 11, 2026

Respondents’ proffered evidence does not establish Petitioner may be detained under § 1226(c)(1)(A). … Radcliffe, 292 F.3d 1209, 1215-1216 (9th Cir. 2002) (“BIA case law has established three requirements which must be met for an admission to qualify as having been validly obtained.

Neel v. Social Security Administration

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Sep 7, 2021

Standard of Review The Social Security Act (the Act) provides disability insurance benefits to qualifying individuals who have a physical or mental disability … The ALJ’s findings must “be consistent with and supported by the evidence, and be clearly articulated so the individual and any subsequent reviewer can assess how the adjudicator evaluated the individual’s symptoms.”

Tobias v. Alvarado

United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Nov 27, 2019

Alvarado testified that she needed the $5,000 to deposit in her bank account in order to qualify for a bank loan. [Doc. 59, Tr. 91-92]. … The burden of proof for establishing an exception to discharge is a preponderance of the evidence. Grogan v. Garner, 498 U.S. 279, 286-87, 111 S.Ct. 654 (1991). B.

Trillium Transportation Fuels LLC v. Integral Energy LLC

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · May 23, 2023

Read as a whole, Paragraph 10 establishes a series of mandatory dispute resolution processes—each denoted by the term “shall.”16 The “commonly repeated rule is that shall is mandatory,”17 and though the term may … Even in the context of particularly strong clear-statement rules, like waivers of sovereign immunity, courts do not impose “magic words” requirements if the intent of the relevant parties is “clearly discernable” from the

Laca v. United States

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Apr 5, 2024

Jones’s arguments for immunity and stay are distinct from those belatedly asserted by the Government. … The Government also affirmatively states it “is not claiming a qualified privilege for the OIG internal investigation report” (ECF No. 109 at 4) and that it “has not claimed the OIG internal investigation report is subject

Ponds v. Harding

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Mar 21, 2024

Clearly established federal law “refers to the holdings, as opposed to the dicta, of the [Supreme] Court’s decisions as of the time of the relevant state-court decision.” Dodd v. … Respondent contends that Ponds’s claim is foreclosed because it is not supported by clearly established law. Dkt. # 8, at 85-86.

Benton v. State Ex Rel. Pruet

175 Okla. 54 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 5, 1935

This case clearly contemplates that securities for deposit of county funds must be accepted and approved by the board of county commissioners ; clearly contemplates that unless the county commissioners accept the security … These cases are clearly not similar to the case at bar, and therefore not applicable.

Summer D Baxter

United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jan 6, 2023

Yeates, 807 F.2d at 878 (debt could be considered in `nature of support’ under federal bankruptcy law, even though it would not qualify as support under state law). … Thus, in order to establish that a debt for attorney fees and costs is “in the nature of alimony, maintenance or support” of a debtor's child, a plaintiff must establish that the attorney fees and costs were awarded to a