Case law

Cable v. POLICE AND PENSION RETIREMENT BD.

31 P.3d 392 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 29, 2001

Taylor v. … We will not address Board's first argument, because, according to the appellate record, Board did not raise it before the district court. See City of Bixby v. State ex rel.

Sowell v. State

620 P.2d 429 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Nov 7, 1980

United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. 873 , 95 S.Ct. 2574 , 45 L.Ed.2d 607 (1975). As stated recently in the United States Supreme Court decision of Brown v. … Brown v. Texas, supra. In summing up the actions of Officer Barham it is apparent that he intended to stop and detain the defendant because he “looked suspicious.”

Opinion No. 78-231 (1978) Ag

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Dec 27, 1978

After the challenge period expires, and the petition is validated by the local board as having the sufficient percentage of names, the local board shall call for a secret ballot election." … First National Bank Trust Co. of Chickasha v. U.S., 462 F.2d 908 (1972).

Scott v. State Ex Rel. Shull

153 Okla. 109 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 17, 1931

Shull, Member of the Building and Loan Board of the State of Oklahoma, Plaintiffs, v. Industrial Building & Loan Association, a Corporation, Defendants.” The? … That was done in this case, the board joining in.

Rose v. Durham

10 Okla. 373 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jun 30, 1900

This case was submitted on the same briefs as were filed' in the 'case of the Shawnee Hardware Company v. Durham, No. 976, and the identical questions are involved in this case. … Hence, upon the authority of the Shawnee Hardware Company v. Durham (decided at this term of court) the judgment of the district court is affirmed, at the cost of the appellant.

Crewson v. Spencer

192 Okla. 582 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 13, 1943

Schulte v. Herndon, 184 Okla. 77 , 84 P. 2d 607 ; Hill v. Henry, 190 Okla. 413 , 124 P. 2d 405 , and Knisely v. Board of Trustees, Town of Skiatook, 192 Okla. 1 , 134 P. 2d 971 . … The form thereof is the same as the form examined and approved in Cooper v. Board of Com’rs of Tulsa County, 188 Okla. 42 , 105 P. 2d 1052 . The two lots described in the deed are presumed to be one parcel. Flint v.

Opinion No. (1989)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Sep 25, 1989

Blankenship v. Atoka County, 456 P.2d 537 (Okla. 1969), and Excise Board of Stephens County v. Chicago, R.I. P. Ry. … Reherman v. Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 679 P.2d 1296 (Okla. 1984). See also Pawnee County Excise Board v.

Stakis v. Dimitroff

154 Okla. 9 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 27, 1931

An examination of Goodell v. … Brown v. First Natl. Bk. of Temple, 35 Okla. 726 , 130 P. 140 ; St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Robison, 72 Okla. 269 , 180 P. 702 ; Brown v. Tull, 65 Okla. 119 , 164 P. 785 ; Collier v.

Carden Mining & Milling Co. v. Yost

193 Okla. 423 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 30, 1943

In Guay v. Brown, 83 N. H. 392, 142 Atl. 697 , 60 A. L. … A similar holding was made by the Maine court in Brown v. Otto Nelson Co., 123 Me. 424 , 123 Atl. 421 , 60 A.L.R. 1293 . There the difficulty was acute dilatation of the heart due to shoveling snow.

Opinion No. 75-175 (1975) Ag

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · May 30, 1975

Where the statute fixes a minimum salary, a board has no power to employ for less than the statutory wage." In State, ex rel. Darnell v. … The applicable rule of statutory construction is stated in Shriver v. Graham, Okl.

Mitchell v. Shepherd Mall State Bank

324 F. Supp. 1029 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Mar 23, 1971

See Mid-Eastern Electronics Inc., v. First National Bank, 380 F.2d 355 , (4 C.A. 1967); American Card Company v. H. M. H. Company, 97 R.I. 59 , 196 A.2d 150 ; Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Sales, Inc. v. … A more pertinent case involving a trustee in bankruptcy in a situation in pre-code law similar to the present case is Brown v. Camp, 275 F. 612, 613 , in which the Fifth Circuit said: “John E.

Protest of Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry Co.

151 Okla. 137 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 8, 1931

In support thereof, the protestee cites Adjustment Realty Co. v. Excise Board, 141 Okla. 130 , 284 Pac. 27 . … Power v. Wenner, Co. Treas., 121 Okla. 190 , 249 Pac. 408 , and section; 8583, C. O. S. 1921, are cited.

Opinion No. 72-140 (1972) Ag

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Apr 12, 1972

In Pardoe v. … "In State ex rel Newman v.

Thompson v. Bar-S Foods Co.

174 P.3d 567 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 2, 2007

See Hardin v. First Cash Financial Services, Inc., 465 F.3d 470 (10th Cir.2006); Pierce v. Kellogg, Brown & Root, Inc., 245 F.Supp.2d 1212 (E.D.Ok.2003). … Rogers v.

Opinion No. 80-136 (1980) Ag

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Jul 23, 1980

Cf., Oklahoma Alcoholic Beverage Control Board v. Heublein Wines, International, 566 P.2d 1158 , 1162 (Okla. 1977). … See, Oklahoma Alcoholic Beverage Control Board v. Burris, P.2d, 51 O.B.A.J. 939 (Okla. 1980) reh. denied, June 30, 1980, No. 52,197.

Humphrey v. Morgan

30 Okla. 343 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 18, 1911

Pryor, the only other witness who noticed dogs at all, testified that he saw th-ee dogs, one a yellowish-brown cur, the other a short brown dog, that looked like a water spaniel, and the third a spotted bird dog. … See Dunlap & Taylor v. Flowers, 21 Okla. 600 , 96 Pac. 643 ; Bales v. Northwestern Consol. Milling Co., 21 Okla. 421 , 96 Pac. 599 .

Opinion No. (2000)

Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · Sep 6, 2000

THE BOARD OF DENTISTRY ¶ 4 The Board is typical of numerous professional licensing boards in the State of Oklahoma. … ."); Burger King Corp. v.

Questions Submitted by: The Honorable Tim Turner, Representative, Oklahoma House of Representatives, District 15

2025 OK AG 6 · Oklahoma Attorney General Reports · May 2, 2025

Const. art V, § 1; see also Okla. Const. art. … Ruth v.

Karns v. Pentecostal Church of God

148 Okla. 41 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 17, 1931

Under authority of Taylor v. Taylor, 90 Okla. 128 , 2T5 Pac. 1070; Smith v. Walker, 116 Okla. 213 , 243 Pac. 955 , the judgment is affirmed. See, also, section 9741, C. O. … And Michie v. Haas, 134 Okla. 57 , 272 Pac. S85, wherein it was held: “The redemption period is therefore two years and such additional time as intervenes prior to the issuance of the deed.” LESTER, C. J., CLARK, V. C.

Thompson v. Smith

420 P.2d 526 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 1, 1966

Brown who testified from his records that the plumbing materials were first furnished on March 1, 1960. … Clark v. Addison, Okl., 311 P.2d 256 ; Fane Development Co. v. Townsend, Okl., 381 P.2d 1012 .