Case law

O'Brien Packing Co. v. Martin

172 Okla. 157 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 26, 1935

De Graffenreid et al. v. Iowa Land & Trust *158 Co., 20 Okla. 687 , 95 P. 624 ; Lambert v. Board of Trustees of Public Library of Owensboro, 151 Ky. 725 , Ann. Cas. 1915A, 180, and cases tbierein cited and annotated. … Wells Fargo Express Co., 22 Okla. 377 , 97 P. 1003 ; State v. Prairie Oil & Gas Co., 64 Okla. 267 , 167 P. 756 ; Parwal Inv. Co. v.

Keokuk v. Ulam

4 Okla. 5 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 6, 1896

(Code of Civil Procedure, ch. 66, §§ 3907, 3908; Fellows v. Blacksmith, 19, How. 366; Pkap-wah-asb-kum v. Sims, 8 Fed. Rep. 740; Wau-pe-nea v qua v. Aldrich, 28 Fed Rep. 489; Swartzel et al. v. … Rogers, 3 Kan. 372 ; Wiley v. Keokuk, 6 Kan. 94 ; Wiley v. Mans-to-wab, 6 Kan. 111 ; Lowry v. Weaver, 4 McLean, 82 ; Const, of U. S. Art. 1, Sec. 2; Elk v. Wilkins, 112, U. S. 112.)

Maud Oil & Gas Co. v. Bodkin

75 Okla. 6 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 4, 1919

The case is briefed and appears to have been tried on the theory that because of the presence of the surrender clause in the lease the lessor had the right to terminate the lease at will, and Brown et al. v. … The trial court followed this decision, but since the trial of the cause the rule announced in Brown v. Wilson has been overruled by Rich v.

In Re Magnolia Petroleum Co.

138 Okla. 205 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 28, 1929

Lillard v. Meisberger, 113 Okla. 228 , 240 Pac. 1067 . The act requires this court to set t'he cause for hearing after conditions performed. … LESTER, V. O. J., and HUNT, CLARK, HEFNER, OULLISON, and SWINDALL, JJ., concur. MASON, O. J., and RILEY, J., absent.

Opinion No. (2010)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · May 17, 2010

Jackson v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 16 , 648 P.2d 26 , 29 (Okla. 1982). … [And it] may be budgeted and expended by the Construction Industries Board."

Dougherty-Nichols Construction Co. v. Town of Jenks

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

, township board, school district board or any member or members of the aforesaid commissioners, or of any of the above named boards, to make any contract for, incur, acknowledge, approve, allow or authorize any indebtedness … No authorities are cited in support of this contention, and it seems to be contrary to the rule announced by this court in tile case of Board of County Commissioners of Washita County v.

Pinnacle Design, Inc. v. Buchanan

66 O.B.A.J. 1254 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jan 10, 1995

First Nat’l Bank and Trust Co. v. Kissee, 859 P.2d 502 (Okla.1993). … Our supreme court has held, however, that exhaustion of remedies before a county equalization board is not required before a party may proceed under section 2871. Independent School Dist. No. 9 v.

Todd v. Lansdown

747 P.2d 312 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 31, 1987

As the United States Supreme Court stated in Brown v. … See Brown, supra, 432 U.S. at 167-68 , 97 S.Ct. at 2226-27 . Accordingly, the greater offense is by definition the “same” for purposes of double jeopardy as any lesser offense included in it.

Manning v. STATE EX REL. DPS

71 P.3d 527 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Feb 18, 2003

MANNING, Plaintiff/Appellee, v. STATE of Oklahoma ex rel. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, Defendant/Appellant. No. 98,622. Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma, Division No. 2. February 18, 2003. … Abdoo v. State ex rel. Dept. of Pub. Safety, 1990 OK CIV APP 2 , ¶ 11, 788 P.2d 1389, 1393 . ¶ 5 The material facts presented here are not in dispute and therefore this case presents a question of law. Thomas v.

Velharticky v. Independent School District No. 3 of Roger Mills County

846 F. Supp. 941 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · May 17, 1993

In Hicks v. … In Harlow v.

Opinion No. 72-162 (1972) Ag

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jun 7, 1972

Home-Stake Production Company v. Board of Equalization of Seminole County, Okl., 416 P.2d 917 (1966). … City of Tulsa v. Midland Valley R. Co., 168 F.2d 252 (10th Cir. 1948). Accordingly, the cases in Oklahoma have consistently adhered to the rule set forth in Tulsa Exposition Fair Corporation v.

Opinion No. 71-275 (1971) Ag

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jun 4, 1971

An officer under 51 O.S. 6 [ 51-6 ] (1961), was defined in Sparks v. … Jur. 880 ; Farley v. Board of Education of City of Perry, 62 Okl. 181 , 162 P. 797 .

Glossip v. State

157 P.3d 143 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Apr 13, 2007

In Pink v. … In Lanning v.

Ross Ex Rel. Ross v. City of Shawnee

683 P.2d 535 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 26, 1984

In Graves v. Rose, 663 P.2d 733 (Okl.1983), we said, “... notice of a claim for relief must be distinguished from notice of a traffic collision (or other tort).” [emphasis added]. 2. In Johns v. … In Reirdon v. Wilburton Board of Education, 611 P.2d 239 (Okl.1980), we found the Political Subdivision Tort Claims Act constitutional. AFFIRMED.

Fox v. Sedan Consolidated School District No. 9

187 Okla. 425 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 18, 1940

See Koch v. Harris, 117 Okla. 172 , 245 P. 848 . The sufficiency of such petition is a question of fact to. be determined in the first instance by the district board. … J.,' WELCH, V. C. J., and HURST, DAVISON, and DANNER, JJ., concur. RILEY, CORN, and GIBSON, JJ., absent.

Opinion No. 75-155 (1975) Ag

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Apr 7, 1975

the board? … These opinions espouse the intent of 21 O.S. 481 [ 21-481 ] (1971) et seq. as stated in Reddell v. State, 14 Okl. Cr. 199 , 170 P. 273 (1918), wherein the Court said: ". . .

Underwriters Land Co. v. Willis

95 Okla. 182 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 18, 1923

Associated Employers’ Reciprocal et al. v. State Industrial Commission et al., 83 Okla. 73 , 200 Pac. 862 ; Huttig Lead & Zinc Co. v. Brown, 90 Okla. 80 , 215 Pac. 1056 . … Brown, supra, wherein it was held that the last paragraph of subdivision 3, sec. 7290, Comp.

In Re General Motors Corp." Piston Slap" Prods. Liability Litigation

385 F. Supp. 2d 1181 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Aug 8, 2005

Lee v. … Brown was substituted as the named plaintiff for John Remor on January 20, 2005. 2 .

Norton v. Choctaw, Oklahoma & Gulf Railway Co.

16 Okla. 482 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 15, 1906

as are concerned in the action before us, provided certain regulations fcr the proper performance of such duties, fixed the first Monday in March as the time therefor, and by a later section in the same act, required the board … By act of February 24, 1899, being sec. 5994 of Wilson’s Statutes, a territorial board of equalization is formed, and its sittings fixed to commence on the third Monday in June in each j^ear.

Opinion No. (1986)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Mar 14, 1986

Shipp v. Southeastern Oklahoma Industries Auth ., 498 P.2d 1395 , 1398 (Okla. 1972). … Board whereby the County Board has assumed responsibility for the city or town's waste, and (3) the agreement authorizes the County Board to exercise such authority.