Case law

Opinion No. 68-145 (1968) Ag

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Mar 1, 1968

The board or officer must administer the licensing statute in accordance with its provisions." The Oklahoma Supreme Court in Boydston v. … Eslin v.

Opinion No. 69-193 (1969) Ag

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jun 6, 1969

Boards of Education — Travel Expenses A board of education may legally pay the expenses of one or more of its members to attend the National School Administrators Convention and the National School Boards Association Convention … The board must still determine within its own discretion what travel is necessary, suitable, and proper for the needs of the particular school district. In the case of Kay County, Excise Board v. Atchison, T. S.F.R.

Goodbarry v. State

50 Okla. Crim. 185 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 14, 1931

In Ricketts v. State, 23 Okla. … In Magee v.

HELLER v. BALLINGER

2023 OK CIV APP 4 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · May 17, 2022

HELLER v. … Brown, Sara D. Willey, Tommy J. Pfeil, BALL MORSE LOWE, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, for Appellant Richard E. Smalley, IV, Tristan L. Davis, REDHAWK LAW, Norman, Oklahoma, for Appellees Hallie E.

United States v. Eason Oil Co.

8 F. Supp. 365 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Sep 22, 1934

Cornell v. Coyne, 192 U. S. 418 , 24 S. Ct. 383 , 48 L. Ed. 504 ; Browning v. Waycross, 233 U. S. 16, 22 , 34 S. Ct. 578 , 58 L. Ed. 828 ; Delaware, Lackawanna & Western R. R. Co. v. … Chicago Board of Trade v.

In Re Protest of Bendelari, Agent

82 Okla. 97 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 8, 1921

Co. v. Harrison, 235 U. … the judgment of the State Board of Equalization is therefore affirmed.

IN RE AMENDMENTS TO RULE 5 AND 8 OF DISCIPLINARY RULES OF STATE BD. OF EXAMINERS OF CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTERS

2023 OK 106 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 13, 2023

The Board may initiate a complaint upon its own motion. b) A complaint shall be filed with the Secretary of the Board, who shall transmit copies to all members of the Board. … Citationizer © Summary of Documents Citing This Document Cite Name Level Oklahoma Supreme Court Cases Cite Name Level 2023 OK 118 , UNDERWOOD v. STATE BD. OF EXAMINERS OF CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTERS Cited Title 20.

Opinion No. 72-128 (1972) Ag

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Feb 24, 1972

** Summary ** CALLING SPECIAL SCHOOL BOARD ELECTION A local board of education of a school district is not authorized to call a special election for purposes of filling a vacancy on said board; a county election board is … matter prevails over a general statute which does not refer to particular subject matter but does contain language which might be broad enough to cover the subject matter if a special statute was not in existence, Reubin v.

Wright & Edwards v. Oklahoma Employment Security Commission

68 O.B.A.J. 915 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 11, 1997

Employment Security Commission v. Board of Review, 914 P.2d 1088 (Okla.App.1996). See also, Uniroyal Goodrich Tire Co. v. Okla. Employment Security Commission, 913 P.2d 1377 (Okla.App.1996). … We held, in Oklahoma Employment Security Commission v.

City of Tecumseh v. City of Shawnee

148 Okla. 128 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 17, 1931

The same rule was announced in Goar v. Brown, 82 Okla. 227 , 200 Pac. 156 . and in Re Incorporation of Town of Big Cabin, 132 Okla. 200 , 270 Pac. 75 . In Wadsworth v. Neher, 138 Okla. 4 , 280 Pac. 263 , Mr. … Kimberlin v. Board’ of Commissioners of Garvin County, 78 Okla. 143 , 189 Pac. 361 .

Simpson v. Highfill

172 Okla. 141 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 7, 1935

This rule is stated in Wilson v. … L. 1114; Thayer v. Honeywell (Kan. App.) 51 P. 929 ; Brown v. Brown (Cal. App.) 256 P. 595 ; Spencer v. Industrial Comm. (Utah) 20 P. (2d) 618 . No evidence of a former adjudication was before the court.

Whitehall Homeowners Ass'n v. Appletree Enterprise, Inc.

309 P.3d 144 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 3, 2013

Finnell v. Jebco Seismic, 2003 OK 35, ¶ 7 , 67 P.3d 339, 342 . … The decision in Twin Creek Estates, LLC v.

Opinion No. (1994)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Nov 3, 1994

The second part of question one is whether the board has the power to attach covenants running with the land to property the board is selling. The case of Carlyle v. Independent School Dist. … I-71, 811 P.2d 618 , 620 (Okla.App. 1991) citing Board of Education of Oklahoma City v. Cloudman, 185 Okla.400, 92 P.2d 837 , 841 (1939), addresses the general issue of local school board power.

Semke v. Wiles

101 Okla. 105 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 19, 1924

Jacobs, secretary of the county election board! … Excise Board of Bryan County, 91 Okla. 101 , 216 Pac. 654 .

Fields v. Victor Building & Loan Co.

73 Okla. 207 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 8, 1918

In the case of Adams v. Burke, 201 Ill. 395 , 66 N. … Gaar, Scott & Co. v. Rogers, 49 Okla. 67 , 148 Pac. 161 ; Burton v. Lithic Mfg. Co., 73 Ore. 605 , 144 Pac. 1151 ; Camden Land Co. v. Lewis, 101 Me. 78 , 63 Atl. 523 .

Opinion No. (1993)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Aug 6, 1993

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS RECEIVED YOUR LETTER ASKING, IN EFFECT, THE FOLLOWING QUESTION: MAY THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF REGISTERED DENTISTS (THE "DENTAL BOARD") CEASE THE ISSUANCE OF TEMPORARY CERTIFICATES OF ABILITY TO PRACTICE … TRUNK V. HERTZ CORP., 200 N.E.2D 894, 896 (OHIO APP. 1964); WOLVERINE SHOE AND TANNING CORP. V. ALDEN'S. INC., 35 F.R.D. 342 , 343 (W.D. MICH. 1964).

Opinion No. 11-7 (2011)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jun 30, 2011

Jobe v. State ex rel. Dep `t of Pub. Safety , 243 P.3d 1171 , 1175 (Okla. 2010). … Rogers v. Quiktrip Corp. , 230 P.3d 853 , 859 (Okla. 2010).

Moore v. Oklahoma Employment Security Commission

301 P.3d 885 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 27, 2012

Willis v. … See Samman v.

City of Alva v. Mason

150 Okla. 25 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 23, 1931

In Allen v. … In Pine v.

Opinion No. 72-127 (1972) Ag

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · May 1, 1972

An early Oklahoma case, The Guthrie Daily Leader v. … Further, in Mid-Continent Building Co. v.