Case law

Ex Parte Ferguson

62 Okla. Crim. 145 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 16, 1937

We fully concur in the views expressed in the quotations from the opinions in the foregoing cases and the principles established by them. … The laws of the state operate within the limits of municipalities the same as elsewhere unless otherwise clearly provided by the statutes.

PLUMLEY v. STATE

2017 OK CIV APP 26 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Apr 7, 2017

State asserted below that § 18 "establishes that a petitioner must meet one of twelve different qualifications before being entitled to petition the court for an expungement of criminal records[.]" … Clearly, Petitioner would not qualify for expungement under this particular provision until a much later date if the law in effect in July 2012 applied to this case.

Nichols v. State

10 Okla. Crim. 12 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jul 8, 1913

it was a miscarriage of justice to grant immunity to Roscoe Barney, when the evidence of his guilt was undisputed. … The state only demands the punishment of a citizen when his guilt has been clearly established according to the forms and rules of law prescribed for ascertaining his guilt. • It is not to shield the guilty, but to protect

Jurkowski v. Crawley

637 P.2d 56 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Sep 22, 1981

Amant cause, listed above, although ruled insufficient to establish reckless disregard on cer-tiorari, are not all present in the cause before this Court. … Amant and other cases in the same vein clearly demonstrate that failure to investigate does not establish the actual malice standard required to subject a publisher to liability for defamation of a public official.

AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC. v. STATE ex rel. OKLAHOMA TAX COMMISSION

341 P.3d 56 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 18, 2014

To maintain this certification, AA is required to follow FAA regulations and guidelines established by original equipment manufacturers. … as a qualified aircraft maintenance facility.

Lewis v. Sac & Fox Tribe of Oklahoma Housing Authority

65 O.B.A.J. 535 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 9, 1994

The 1937 Act clearly authorizes the establishment of IHAs in conformity to state law for the purpose of providing low-income housing projects for Indians. 54 Nor are we aware of any legislative history that Congress by “unmistakable … The terms of 24 C.F.R. § 905.125 (1990) are: "An IHA may be established pursuant to a State law that provides for the establishment of IHAs with all necessary legal powers to carry out low-income housing projects for Indians

Sullivan v. State ex rel. Oklahoma Tax Commission

841 P.2d 619 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 30, 1992

She predicates this conclusion on her affidavit evidence which she says establishes that: (1) “State employees are now worse off with the raising of the exemption lid” evidently referring to the severe reduction of the erstwhile … This court will take judicial notice that retirement benefits play a significant role in the recruitment and retention of qualified employees in both the public and private sectors.

Allison v. Massey

108 Okla. 140 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 3, 1925

We think it is well established that under a statute such as this, when there is no constitutional inhibition, the tenure of office of the person elected is not only for the number of years specifically mentioned, but that … By failure to qualify is not meant inability to qualify because of death, for a dead man cannot be said to fail to do anything.

Cobb v. Board of Com'rs of Seminole County

50 Okla. 594 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Aug 3, 1915

what precedes it, unless it clearly appears to have been intended to apply to some other matter. … clearly his right to exemption.”

Terry v. Edgin

598 P.2d 228 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 24, 1979

Clearly, the Constitution and statutes are to guide the courts concerning the status of the common law immunity doctrine in Oklahoma. … First, quoting from an earlier case: "The right of the sovereign state to immunity from suit is a public right and must not be treated as relinquished or conveyed away by inference or construction, and statutes must clearly

Tucker v. State

499 P.2d 458 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 21, 1972

Defendant argues that Maynard, who was granted immunity from prosecution and testified as a state’s witness in chief, when called as a rebuttal witness was merely repetitious of the earlier testimony. … Clearly, if the trial court may not so instruct the jury, it is improper for the prosecuting attorney to so instruct the jury.

Harris v. McCurtain County Jail Trust

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Jul 17, 2023

On July 7, 2023, Defendant Manning filed an Amended Motion to Quash Deposition Notice arguing that since Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss on Qualified Immunity remains pending, the Court should stay discovery until the immunity … However, even if the Court dismissed her from this action under qualified immunity, this alone would not eliminate the necessity for her deposition in this case.

Cherokee Nation v. Nations Bank, N.A.

67 F. Supp. 2d 1303 · District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Jul 15, 1999

No evidence has been presented establishing any impediment to the entry of either the judgment or garnishment order by virtue of the Cherokee Nation’s assertion of sovereign immunity. … The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the incorporated Seminole Tribe was immune from garnishment proceedings because its waiver of immunity contained within its bylaws was expressly qualified and excluded from the

United States v. Ken Mar Associates, Ltd.

697 F. Supp. 400 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Oct 27, 1987

Defendants’ counterclaim for abuse of discretion clearly falls within an exception to the waiver of sovereign immunity under the Federal Tort Claims Act, and is therefore not actionable. … Griffith acknowledges at page 3 of his September 17, 1987, affidavit that the government did not comply with items 10 and 17 of the scheduling order established by Judge Alley, pertaining to dispositive motions and proposed

Collins v. State

15 Okla. Crim. 96 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 7, 1918

Another objection that is clearly without merit relates to a certain conversation that the deputy sheriff, Larrison, had with Mrs. … The bullets themselves were permitted to be introduced in evidence, and this character of demonstrative evidence is always permissible where material to the issues, and in this case we think it clearly established that the

CONNER v. STATE

2025 OK 12 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 25, 2025

The State of Oklahoma does hereby adopt the doctrine of sovereign immunity. … Thus, because these "constitutional" torts are now clearly "torts" governed by the GTCA, the GTCA's specific prohibition against tort suits arising out of the "operation or maintenance of any prison, jail or correctional

Lewis v. Edmond City of

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jul 6, 2021

When a defendant asserts qualified immunity at summary judgment, the plaintiff must establish that the defendant violated a constitutional right and that the right was clearly established at the time of the constitutional … Sheehan, 575 U.S. 600, 613 (2015) (“Qualified immunity is no immunity at all if ‘clearly established’ law can simply be defined as the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.”); Estate of Ceballos v.

Faulk v. Board of Com'rs of Marshall County

40 Okla. 705 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 28, 1914

However, be that as it may, whether the facts suggested by such an admission are established or not, and we are willing to concede that the submission was in excess of the income and revenue for that year, yet this is not … To adopt this view would be in opposition to every well known rule of construction and have us reach a conclusion in the face of the meaning clearly stated in both the organic and statutory law of this state.

Polk v. Oklahoma Alcoholic Beverage Control Board

420 P.2d 520 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Nov 9, 1966

It was stipulated further that plaintiff otherwise was a qualified person except for the statutory requirement of population. … Every legislative act is presumed constitutional, and cannot be declared unconstitutional unless clearly so. Tate v. Logan, Okl., 362 P.2d 670 .

BOOTH v. HOME DEPOT

2022 OK 16 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Feb 15, 2022

¶12 Appellant argues that, because the Acts protect all Oklahomans from criminal actions of fraud by a retailer, public policy is clearly established. Not so. The OCPA and the HRFA are not primarily criminal statutes. … Without a clear mandate from the Legislature, the Acts do not qualify as an established public policy.