Case law

State Ex Rel. Central State Griffin Memorial Hospital v. Reed

493 P.2d 815 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 1, 1972

State Hospital contends that Section 115, supra, establishes liability of a husband or his estate for hospital care and treatment of his wife. … Clearly this is an expression of the legislative concern for the expediting and disposing of administration of estates without delay.

Boyd v. United States Ex Rel. United States Army Corps of Engineers

631 F. Supp. 814 · District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Jan 6, 1986

Areas to be zoned will be clearly marked with buoys complying with the Uniform State Waterway Marking System. … It also includes determinations made by executives or administrators in establishing plans, specifications or schedules of operations. Where there is room for policy judgment and decision there is discretion.

In Re Supreme Court Adjudication of Sufficiency of Initiative Petition in Tulsa

597 P.2d 1208 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 3, 1979

Briefly stated, the initiative petition is directed to establishing a minimum number of police officers at the national average per 1,000 of population and setting salaries for these personnel at not less than the average … The matter dealt with in this petition is not a legislative matter, but clearly involves administrative discretion.

Opinion No. (1987) Ag

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jan 27, 1987

SUCCESSORS ARE ELECTED AND QUALIFIED. … THE STATUTE CLEARLY PROVIDES THAT THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS MAY ONLY CONSIST OF NINE MEMBERS, AND THAT THERE MUST BE NINE MEMBERS.

BARNARD v. SUTTON

321 P.3d 999 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 21, 2013

Thus, Sutton asserts, he is immune from suit under the GTCA. ¶7 The trial court concluded that after the Employee Defendants were granted judgment, the only remaining defendants were OSU and Sutton. … Sutton was clearly an employee of OSU at the time of the accident. 51 O.S. Supp.2010 § 152(7) ("'Employee' means any person who is authorized to act in behalf of a political subdivision or the state ...").

Johnson v. Oklahoma Department of Veterans Affairs

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Mar 19, 2021

Defendants have asserted the defense of qualified immunity, which shields government officials from liability for civil damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … In response to the defense of qualified immunity, Plaintiff must show: (1) that the particular defendant's actions violated a federal constitutional or statutory right, and, if so, (2) that the right was clearly established

Aircraft Equipment Co. v. Kiowa Tribe of Oklahoma

939 P.2d 1143 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Aug 21, 1997

(Citations omitted) 498 U.S. at 510 [ 111 S.Ct. at 910 ] Then after discussing Congress's consistent reluctance to undercut tribal sovereign immunity it said: Under these circumstances, we are not disposed to modify the long-established … This paragraph clearly shows that in lawsuits against Indian tribes a right does not necessarily carry with it a complete remedy, according to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Moman v. Barnhart

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Aug 25, 2022

Qualified immunity Defendants contend they are entitled to summary judgment as to both Fourth Amendment claims on the basis of qualified immunity because (1) the undisputed … But individual officials are entitled to qualified immunity only “if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights.” Mayfield v.

Wright v. Kay County Justice Facilities Authority

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Feb 24, 2020

Defendant Ware also asserts the claim against him should be dismissed as he is entitled to qualified immunity. Defendant’s request for dismissal pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. … As for Defendant Ware’s claim of qualified immunity, he does not assert that the right allegedly violated was not clearly established.

Oklahoma Tax Commission v. City Vending of Muskogee, Inc.

63 O.B.A.J. 2287 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 14, 1992

The Commission may have indeed exceeded its taxing power by including in the contested assessment transactions that qualify as federally exempt intratribal sales. … This statutory scheme should be administered to preserve the established exemptions.

Harris v. Rich

104 Okla. 120 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 21, 1924

That doctrine has been recognized and established in this jurisdiction. German-American Ins. Co. v. Huntley, 62 Okla. 39 , 161 Pac. 815 . … We think the instructions of the court with reference to the question of qualified privilege clearly covered the instructions requested by the defendant.

Lucas v. Canadian Valley Area Vocational Technical School of Chickasha

63 O.B.A.J. 551 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jan 7, 1992

Thus, on the face of their Petition, Appellants have clearly stated contract claims under which relief could be granted. … Appellee raises for the first time on appeal the question of whether Appellants must plead facts establishing an appropriation exists from which Appellee could pay a judgment in a contract action.

Jones v. Denton

192 Okla. 234 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Dec 22, 1942

S. 1941 § 61, the burden was on contestants to establish its invalidity according to the allegations of their pleading. … While the rule is that one offering a will for probate always has the burden of establishing the will, this rule does not apply to contests on wills after probate. In 68 C.

Child Doe 1, a minor, by and through parent and next friend, Parent Doe 1, et al. v. Tulsa County, ex. rel. Juvenile Bureau of the Tulsa County District Court, et al.

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Sep 11, 2026

Comm’rs, 965 F.3d 1114, 1115 n.1 (10th Cir. 2020) (per curium) (“[A]lthough qualified immunity only shields individuals—municipal liability for claims of deliberate indifference must follow only from clearly established … “To overcome qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show (1) facts that demonstrate the officials violated a federal constitutional or statutory right, which (2) was clearly established at the time of the defendant’

Allen v. Lenape Lure Co.

73 O.B.A.J. 2138 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Apr 26, 2002

Creek Nation, 1997 OK 41 , 986 P.2d 985 , 2 the panel found Claimant had failed to satisfy his burden of establishing First Nations' insurance premiums were calculated in part upon Claimant's salary. … He does not appeal the finding the Tribe is immune from suit.

Patterson v. Cohlmia

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Sep 23, 2020

Qualified immunity protects government officials, in their individual capacities, from liability for civil damages if their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … Once a defendant invokes a qualified immunity defense, the plaintiff must show that the defendant violated a statutory or constitutional right, and that the right was clearly established.

Hayes v. Owen

District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · May 16, 2024

Similarly, as to qualified immunity, Plaintiffs do not show a connection between the information sought and the validity of the immunity defense. See Gutierrez, 841 F.3d at 908. … Plaintiffs make no attempt to tie the proposed discovery to a clearly established federal constitutional or statutory right. See Heard v.

Hofferber v. First National Bank

451 F. Supp. 444 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · May 5, 1977

In her Response to Defendant’s Motion, Plaintiff states: “This Plaintiff would like to point out to the Court that the judicial immunity, as a creature and establishment of the judicial system, was recognized by the Plaintiff … Judicial Immunity, . . .’

Howard v. Webb

570 P.2d 42 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 4, 1977

established the nature of the privilege as being freedom from arrest in civil proceedings only. 10 Geo. … Justice Brandeis wrote for the Court: "Clause 1 [of Art I, § 6] defines the extent of the immunity.

Ford v. Tulsa Public Schools

405 P.3d 142 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 27, 2017

of imparting notice of the claim and hold that although the notice given did not conform to the authorized procedures under the [Political Subdivision Torts Claims Act, 51 O.S. 1981 § 151 et seg.], it was sufficient to establish … As explained by the Oklahoma Supreme Court in a case cited by Shanbour : The [GTCA] adopted the common law doctrine of sovereign immunity and then partially waived the immunity....