Case law

Opinion No. 70-205 (1970) Ag

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jun 15, 1970

In consequence, the Order of the Board of County Commissioners is presently in effect. In Edge v. … In Butler v.

Haunstein v. State Bar of Oklahoma

172 Okla. 610 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 18, 1935

Chicago Bar Ass’n v. Lotterman et al. (Ill.) 187 N. E. 424 ; In re Hadwiger et al., 167 Okla. 307 , 27 P. (2d) 604 . … J., OSBORN, V. O. J., and BUSBY, PHELPS, and GIBSON, JJ., concur. RILEY and BAYLESS, JJ., dissent. WELCH, J., absent.

Kitchens v. State

576 P.2d 775 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 27, 1978

All of these items were identified by Brown as being items taken in the burglary of the Southwestern Bell building on December 27. … In Harrell v.

Opinion No. (1992)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · May 4, 1992

TEXAS OKLAHOMA EXPRESS V. SORENSON, 652 P.2D 285, 287; ROTRAMEL V. PUBLIC SERVICE CO., 546 P.2D 1015, 1017 (OKLA.1975). … 2) THE RULES AND REGULATIONS PROMULGATED BY THE ARCHITECTURAL BOARD HAVE THE EFFECT OF LAW.

Opinion No. 76-257 (1976) Ag

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jul 22, 1976

Concerning that language of Article XXIII, Section 10, the Court in Coyle v. … It is clear from the foregoing, that the Court in Coyle v.

Bocox v. Town of Bixby

114 Okla. 269 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 20, 1926

In Pitser v. … Co. v.

State v. State Ex Rel.

142 Okla. 291 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 8, 1930

This court in Holbert v. Patrick, 72 Okla. 25 , 177 P. 566 , held that: "Section 5238, Rev. … In the case of Nichols v. Lonsdale, 109 Okla. 59 , 234 P. 753 , this court later held that: "Section 782, C. O.

Medcalf v. Coleman

74 O.B.A.J. 1863 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · May 13, 2003

The Board of Directors ultimately revoked Medcalfs staff privileges. … Id. at ¶ 24, 545 P.2d at 742 . ¶ 12 Another case we find helpful is Theissen v. Watonga Municipal Hospital Board, 1976 OK 66 , 550 P.2d 938 .

School Dist. No. 36 v. Pippin

134 Okla. 136 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 11, 1928

This precise question was under consideration in Barney v. School District No. 98, Payne County, 120 Okla. 303 , 251 Pac. 737 ; School District No. 76 of Creek County v. … Bath, 120 Okla. 204 , 250 Pac. 1003 ; and Gentis v. Hunt, 121 Okla. 71 , 247 Pac. 358 .

Gordon v. Conner

183 Okla. 82 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 7, 1938

Dolezal v. Bostick, Co. Atty., 41 Okla. 743 , 139 P. 964 ; Bailey v. Lankford, 54 Okla. 692 , 154 P. 672 ; Reeves v. Noble, 88 Okla. 179 , 212 P. 995 . … See State v. Cease, 28 Okla. 271 , 114 P. 251 .

In Re Benedictine Fathers of Sacred Heart Mission

45 Okla. 358 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 10, 1914

Board of County Com’rs of Kingfisher County v. Guarantee State Bank et at., 27 Okla. 736, 117 Pac. 216 ; State et al. v. Cawthorn’s Estate, 31 Okla. 560 , 122 Pac. 522 ; Asher State Bank v. … Baker v. Newton et al., 22 Okla. 658, 98 Pac. 931 . As was said in that case, no procedure is prescribed by the 'Constitution, nor is it provided upon what conditions the writ shall issue.

RIDINGS v. MAZE

2018 OK 18 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 6, 2018

Fanning v. … BROWN Discussed 2011 OK 72 , 258 P.3d 521 , SHULL v. REID Discussed 2012 OK 2 , 270 P.3d 155 , WILSON v. STATE ex rel. STATE ELECTION BOARD Discussed 1978 OK 27 , 575 P.2d 1374 , BREEDEN v. LEAGUE SERVICES CORP.

Powell v. Powell

191 Okla. 581 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 8, 1942

Plaintiff relies upon the cases of Baker v. Carter, 180 Okla. 71 , 68 P. 2d 85 , and Brown v. Brown, 150 Okla. 217 , 1 P. 2d 167 . … CORN, V. C. J., and RILEY, J., absent.

Keating v. Edmondson

72 O.B.A.J. 3672 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 4, 2001

Macy v. Board of County Comm'rs, 1999 OK 53, ¶ 12 , 986 P.2d 1130 ; Kratz v. Kratz, 1995 OK 63 , ¶ 11, 905 P.2d 753 . 34 . Independent School Dist. No. JI-69 v. Independent School Dist. No. … The people have also had opportunities to allow appointment to boards and commissions by persons other than the Governor.

City of Tulsa v. Parrish

333 P.2d 564 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 23, 1958

"As to the case of Quick v. … "In City of Tulsa, v.

Independent School District No. 8 of Comanche County v. Hunter

414 P.2d 231 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 8, 1966

Co. v. Quick, 68 Pa. 189, 200 ; Greenwich Coal & Coke Co. v. … Lee, Okl., 393 P.2d 515 ; Lahman v.

Opinion No. (2003)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Feb 18, 2003

Porter v. Ferrell, 959 P.2d 576 , 578 (Okla. 1998); Maltsberger v. Bd. of County Comm'rs, 987 P.2d 437 , 438 (Okla.Ct.App. 1999)), it does not always have this meaning. See Davis v. GHS Health Maint. … McNeill v. City of Tulsa, 953 P.2d 329 , 332 (Okla. 1998).

Red Rock Mental Health v. Roberts

940 P.2d 486 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 27, 1997

Union Indemnity Co. v. Sating, 166 Okl. 133 , 26 P.2d 217, 226, 228 (1933). See Board of Law Library Trustees v. State, Okl., 825 P.2d 1285, 1291 (1991); Spain v. Kemell, Okl., 672 P.2d 1162, 1164-1165 (1983); Bryan v. … Lee Way Motor Freight, Inc., Old., 804 P.2d 1138, 1139 (1991); Brown & Root v. Dunkelberger, 196 Okl. 116 , 162 P.2d 1018, 1020 (1945) (overruled in part on other grounds by Tulsa Hotel v.

Opinion No. (1986)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Mar 7, 1986

Absent a rule setting out the procedure to be used by the Board to change a beneficial use designation to a lower designation because of a mistake, the Board may not make such a change. See, Adams v. … At such time as the Board properly adopts such a rule or regulation, the Board may change a beneficial use designation to a less stringent one to correct a factual error. V .

Application of Bd. of Regents, Etc.

595 P.2d 785 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 25, 1979

Proceeds from sale of the 1979 Series Bonds is to complete Phase V of the steam and chilled water plant servicing the Health Sciences Center located in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. … Phase V consists of expansion and improvement of the system.