Case law

Ingram v. State

275 P.2d 334 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 6, 1954

In a companion case herewith, Leasure v. … Holmes, Jr., Little-Browne & Co., Boston. It is only by reason of the incompetence, apathy and laxness of the registration officials that the registration in question was made possible.

Colebrook Guaranty Savings Bank v. Lambert

172 Okla. 80 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 30, 1935

In Akard v. … Davis v. Harrington, 35 Kan. 196 , 10 P. 532 ; Hoffman v. Pack et al. (Mich.) 81 N. W. 934 ; Cowles v. Adams et al. (Neb.) 110 N. W. 697 ; Herr v. Graden (Colo.) 81 P. 242 .

Best v. Evans

297 P.2d 379 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 3, 1956

Owens, 125 Okl. 66 , 256 P. 704 , 52 A.L.R. 1270 ; and Brown v. State, 178 Okl. 506 , 62 P.2d 1208 . Art. … Short v. Martin, supra; State ex. rel. Short v. Owens, supra; and Brown v.

United States v. Veatch

842 F. Supp. 480 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Dec 16, 1993

Brown v. Warden, Great Meadow Correctional Facility, 682 F.2d 348 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 991 , 103 S.Ct. 349 , 74 L.Ed.2d 388 (1982). … Smith is a board certified psychiatrist whose education and experience are greater than the government’s expert. Further, Dr.

McEwen Manufacturing Co. v. Town of Covington

112 Okla. 40 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 9, 1925

In the case of Hamilton v. … In the case of Bodine, County Clerk, v.

Dixon v. Regional University System of the Oklahoma Board of Regents

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · May 17, 2023

Brown v. Presbyterian Healthcare Servs., 101 F.3d 1324, 1331 (10th Cir. 1996) (quoting FDIC v. Oldenburg, 34 F.3d 1529, 1555 (10th Cir. 1994)) (quoting United States v. … See Bennett v.

EGLESTON v. CHESAPEAKE ENERGY CORPORATION

2015 OK CIV APP 66 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 30, 2015

OSCN Found Document:EGLESTON v. … King v.

Bynum v. Strain

95 Okla. 45 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 14, 1923

Ewing v. Turner, 2 Okla. 94 , 35 Pac. 951 ; Cameron v. Parker, 2 Okla. 277 , 38 Pac. 14 ; Howe v. Dunlap, 12 Okla. 467 , 72 Pac. 365 ; State ex rel. Love v. Smith, 43 Okla. 231 , 142 Pac. 408 , 53 L. R. A. (N. … Co. v. Yount, 30 Okla. 371 , 120 Pac. 627 : West v. Madansky, 80 Okla. 161 , 194 Pac. 439 ; Smith v. Gardner, 37 Okla. 183 , 131 Pac. 538 ; Owen et al. v.

Miller v. Oklahoma County Criminal Justice Authority

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Aug 12, 2025

Comm’rs v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397, 404 (1997). Rather, “[t]he plaintiff must also demonstrate that, through its deliberate conduct, the municipality was the ‘moving force’ behind the injury alleged.” Id. … Brown, 520 U.S. at 405. For the third element, Miller must plausibly allege that the Board and OCCJA acted with deliberate indifference.

Hishaw v. State

568 P.2d 643 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 8, 1977

Brown v. State, Okl.Cr., 481 P.2d 475 (1971). Therefore, we have repeatedly held that the proof of mere proximity is insufficient, and in Staples v. … This Court, in Brown v. State, supra, cited with approval Dishman v.

Hatcher v. Roberson

63 Okla. 296 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 9, 1917

Brown, under the deeds of January 5, 1904, and May 4, 1904, and which title to Brown was by him reeonveyed to Green Roberson, the father, and from him, through mesne conveyance, acquired by the original defendant, Henry Hatcher … C.) 199 Fed. 811 , United States v. Cook, 225 Fed. 756 , 141 C. C. A. 22 , Welty v. Reed, 219 Fed. 864 , 135 C. C. A. 534 , Rentie et al. v.

Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co. v. McCurdy

86 Okla. 148 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 9, 1922

The county excise board has nothing to do with making an estimate for the expenditure of this fund, for the obvious reason the statute does not vest the board with any discretion in the matter, but specifically provides how … Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Company v. Johnson, Treasurer, 85 Okla. 161 , 204 Pac. 910 ; St. Louis & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Bockoven, County Treasurer, 75 Okla. 145 , 182 Pac. 507 . The case of F. A. Gillespie v.

Kakkanatt v. Oklahoma Employment Security Commission

183 P.3d 1032 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Feb 8, 2008

Vester v. Board of Review of Oklahoma Employment Security Commission, 1985 OK 21, 112 , 697 P.2d 583, 537 , citing Boynton Cab Company v. … Navickas v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 567 Pa. 298 , 787 A.2d 284 (2001).

Protest of First Nat. Bank of Guthrie

136 Okla. 141 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 23, 1929

State v. Board of Examiners (Mont.) 104 Pac. 1055 .” And this was the use made of the word in Re Shirley, 122 Okla. 109 . 251 Pac. 736 . … Sometimes the excise board would certify a tax rate in excess of that authorized by law. This court had from time to time held that such acts made the tax rate illegal. Albrecht v. Jones, 132 Okla. 277 , 267 Pac. 270 .

State Ex Rel. Matlack v. Oklahoma City

38 Okla. 349 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 10, 1913

See; also, Board of Horn., etc., v. Hart, 29 Okla. 693 , 119 Pac. 132 , 37 L. R. A. (N. S.) 388. Volume 8 of Words and Phrases, p. 6920, cites Lexington v. Bennick, 105 Ky. 779 , 49 S. W. 787 , 50 S. … Rumbold v.

Dixon v. Regional University System of the Oklahoma Board of Regents

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Mar 29, 2023

Bennett v. … Anderson v.

Meads v. Human

84 Okla. 82 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 6, 1921

If said board finds said applicant is of good moral character and upon presenting his diploma with verification and identification, and when said 'board shall be satisfied, as to such matters, it shall register said applicant … J., PITCHEORD, V. C. J., and McNEILL and NICHOLSON, J.T.. concur.

Rose Hill Burial Park v. Garrison

176 Okla. 355 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 24, 1936

Crown Drug Co. v. Hofstrom, 158 Okla. 27 , 12 P. (2d) 519 ; Drumright Feed Co. v. Hunt, 90 Okla. 277 , 217 P. 491 .” In Mobley v. … Maryland Casualty Co. v. State Industrial Commission, 141 Okla. 202 , 284 P. 644 ; Ingram Drug Co. v. O’Brien, 164 Okla. 228 , 23 P. (2d) 642 , and Republic Supply Co. v.

Williams v. Oklahoma Employment Security Commission

66 O.B.A.J. 2352 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · May 2, 1995

In District Court v. … Furthermore, we agree with the reasoning of District Court v. Board of Review and Taylor v. State ex rel.

Shanbour v. Hollingsworth

67 O.B.A.J. 1844 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 28, 1996

Shanbour argued that Horinek v. Board of County Commissioners of Kay County 9 permits time limitations to be enlarged for excusable neglect and that Reirdon v. … Reirdon v. Wilburton Board of Education, 611 P.2d at 241 .