Case law

Opinion No. (1979)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Apr 4, 1979

The construction of the nepotism statutes and the intent of the Legislature, were dealt with in Reddell v. State, 14 Okla. Cr. 199 , 170 P.273 (1918), wherein the Court said: ". . . … The Court went on to say that the nepotism statutes did not prevent a school board member from issuing a warrant to a part-time employee where such person was related to the member of the board.

Adair v. Cable

207 Okla. 123 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Aug 5, 1952

The court in that case refused to enjoin the county election board, and the certificate was issued to Adair. … This is different from the provisions found in 26 O.S. 1951 §§162 and 163, which were construed in Darst v.

Ciempa v. Jones

745 F. Supp. 2d 1171 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Aug 23, 2010

Ciempa brings his RLUIPA claim regarding chapel time against Jones, Morton, and Brown. … Ciempa’s chapel time claim may, however, proceed against Jones and Brown. Brown made the decision to ban the NGE from the chapel.

Opinion No. 74-230 (1974) Ag Part II of Part II

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Oct 2, 1974

In State v. … In Rheam v. Board of Regents, Okl., 18 P.2d 535 , quoted in the case of Baker v.

Opinion No. 77-217 (1977) Ag

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Sep 20, 1977

the State Board of Education, governing the board and the school system of the district; to maintain and operate a complete public school system of such character as the board of education shall deem best suited to the needs … As held in First National Bank and Trust Company of Chickasha v. U.S., 462 F.2d 908 (1972), words which are not defined in a statute are generally to be interpreted in their ordinary, everyday sense.

Davis v. State

560 P.2d 1051 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Mar 2, 1977

In Wright v. … In United States v. Thomas, 489 F.2d 664 (5th Cir. 1973), cited in our recent case of Brown v. State, Okl.Cr., No.

Opinion No. (2000)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jul 5, 2000

supervising physician and as approved by the State Board of Medical Licensure and Supervision after consultation with the State Board of Pharmacy on the Physician Assistant Drug Formulary. … See Cox v. Dawson, 911 P.2d 272 , 276 (Okla. 1996).

Stillwater Bd. of Education v. Aldredge

13 Okla. 205 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 10, 1903

(Aldredge v. School District No. 16, of Payne County, 10 Okla. 694 .) … In the case of Aldredge v.

In Re Felgar's Estate

207 Okla. 310 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 16, 1952

. *311 Monnet, Hayes & Brown, Oklahoma City, Person Woodall, and John M. (Jack) Luttrell, Norman, for plaintiffs in error. Joe A. Smalley and Williams & Benedum, Norman, for defendants in error. CORN, J. … McGill v. Cooper Supply Co., 196 Okla. 362 , 165 P.2d 829 ; see, also, Cockrell v. Martin, 124 Okla. 284 , 255 P. 1101 ; Parks v. Butler, 191 Okla. 329 , 129 P.2d 836 .

State Ex Rel. Schilling v. Oklahoma City

67 Okla. 18 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 9, 1917

Johnston et al. v. … Johnston v.

Lemons v. Shipman

541 P.2d 280 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Sep 9, 1975

The law in this regard is best set forth in the syllabi in Hazlett v. Board of County Commissioners, 168 Okl. 290 , 32 P.2d 940 (1934) which read in part as follows: “3. … Berg v. Willibey, 138 Okl. 110 , 280 P. 456 . “4.

Pina v. Am. Piping Inspection, Inc.

419 P.3d 231 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · May 8, 2018

Vasquez v. Dillard's, Inc., 2016 OK 89 , 381 P.3d 768 ; Brown v. Claims Management Resources Inc., 2017 OK 13 , ¶ 9, 391 P.3d 111 , 115. Appellate review of the judgment in this matter is set forth at 85A O.S. … Bober v. Oklahoma State University , 2016 OK 78 , 378 P.3d 562 [citing State ex rel. Protective Health Servs. State Dep't. Of Health v. Vaughn , 2009 OK 61 , ¶ 9, 222 P.3d 1058 ; Brown v.

Application of Oklahoma Planning & Resources Bd.

274 P.2d 61 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Aug 9, 1954

Kerr v. … The opinions in the first two cases, Baker v. Carter, supra, and Sheldon v.

Bates v. State

96 Okla. Crim. 202 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Dec 17, 1952

It would not have been necessary for the officers to have inquired what was in the car if they had known the lugs on the front seat wrapped in heavy brown paper actually contained whiskey. … Morris v. State, 66 Okla. Cr. 384 , 92 P. 2d 609 ; Leary v. State, 61 Okla. Cr. 298 , 67 P. 2d 972 ; Wallace v. State, 49 Okla. Cr. 281 , 294 P. 198 ; Coffey v. State, 38 Okla. Cr. 91 ,. 258 P. 923 ; Whitford v.

TOCH, LLC v. CITY OF TULSA

474 P.3d 859 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 29, 2020

Fanning v. Brown , 2004 OK 7, ¶ 10 , 85 P.3d 841 . … Discussed 2007 OK 27 , 163 P.3d 512 , FENT v. CONTINGENCY REVIEW BOARD Discussed 2008 OK 95 , 196 P.3d 511 , EOG RESOURCES MARKETING v. OKLAHOMA STATE BD.

Opinion No. 79-356 (1980) Ag

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · May 22, 1980

Woods v. Board of Equalization, Okla., 517 P.2d 430 (1973); Bretts v. Commissioner of Land Office, 17 Okla. 64 , 110 P. 766 (1910). … The Supreme Court in Woods v. State Board of Equalization, supra, expressly held that federal revenue sharing funds were subject to the state's appropriation process.

Green-Boots Const. Co. v. State Highway Commission

165 Okla. 288 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 10, 1933

Dunlap, State Treas., v. … Moreover, in Witt v.

Tishomingo Electric Light & Power Co. v. Harris

28 Okla. 10 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 10, 1911

Co. et al. v. Beale, 4 Okla. 712 , 47 Pac. 481 ; Blanchard v. United States, 6 Okla. 587 , 52 Pac. 736 ; Vandervoort v. Board of Com’rs, 8 Okla. 227 , 57 Pac. 167 ; Hoffman v. … Board of Com'rs, 8 Okla. 225 , 57 Pac. 167 ; Sumner et al. v. Sherwood, 25 Okla. 70 , 105 Pac. 642 .

Tuffy's, Inc. v. City of Oklahoma City

212 P.3d 1158 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jan 20, 2009

Casady School, see note 9, supra; Darrow v. Integris Health, Inc., see note 9, supra; Fanning v. Brown, see note 9, supra. 13 . Gens v. Casady School, see note 9, supra; Fanning v. … Brown, see note 9, supra; Indiana Nat'l Bank v. State Dept. of Human Servs., 1994 OK 98 , ¶ 3, 880 P.2d 371 . 14 . Gens v. Casady School, see note 9, supra; Fanning v. Brown, see note 9, supra; Indiana Nat'l Bank v.

Gayman, County Treasurer v. Mullen

58 Okla. 477 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 10, 1916

Rep. 94 ; McLaughlin v. Newkirk, 57 N. J. Law, 298, 30 Atl. 543 ; State v. Andrews, 20 Tex. 230 ; Central Pacific R. R. Co. v. Shackelford, 63 Cal. 265 ; Swamp Land Drainage District v. … In Bowman v.