Case law

SPANE v. CENTRAL OKLAHOMA COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY

346 P.3d 437 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Feb 5, 2015

The State of Oklahoma does hereby adopt the doctrine of sovereign immunity. … [COCAA] should be de[-]designated at any point"; that termination of the community action agency status for COCAA has never been recommended; that ODOC has continually recognized COCAA as a community action agency; that qualifying

White v. State ex rel. Harris

122 P.3d 484 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Jun 17, 2005

waive any of the immunities afforded by the Eleventh Amendment, state sovereign immunity, or any absolute or qualified immunity held by directors, officers, employees, or members of insured state agencies. … Investigative acts that fall outside the scope of absolute immunity are accorded qualified immunity. (Citations omitted). .

BD. OF CTY. COMMISSIONERS v. ASSOC. OF CTY. COMMISSIONERS OF OKLA. SELF-INSUR. GROUP

2014 OK 87 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Oct 21, 2014

Although it clearly insures, ACCO-SIG is not subject to the general rules of liability imposed on all insurers. III. IS ACCO-SIG PROTECTED BY THE GOVERNMENTAL TORT CLAIMS ACT? … Such an entity shall be eligible to qualify for and hold a certificate of authority to transact insurance in this state."

Redding v. Marsh

750 F. Supp. 473 · District Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Mar 13, 1990

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Marsh also claims qualified immunity. The affirmative defense of qualified immunity is available to all government officials. Harlow v. … The court finds that Marsh is entitled to qualified immunity in that his conduct did not violate the clearly established constitutional rights of which reasonable persons would have known.

Briggs v. Oklahoma ex rel. Oklahoma Department of Human Services

472 F. Supp. 2d 1304 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jan 31, 2007

“The doctrine of qualified immunity shields public officials ... from damages actions unless their conduct was unreasonable in light of clearly established law.” Elder v. … Thus, these defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Bearden v. Oklahoma ex rel. Board of Regents

234 F. Supp. 3d 1148 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Feb 10, 2017

In support of its position that plaintiff has failed to plead facts sufficient to establish a violation of the Rehab Act or Title II of the ADA, the University cites McGuinness v. … Because “[disability discrimination has clearly been identified in the context of public education,” Bowers v.

REYNOLDS v. STATE

2022 OK CR 14 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · Aug 4, 2022

Here, the State has established with reasonable particularity that Reynolds's DVR system was password protected thereby establishing the existence of the password, and that Reynolds was the owner and sole operator of the … system thereby establishing his possession of the password and its authenticity.

M.R. v. Cox

65 O.B.A.J. 2997 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Aug 2, 1994

Finally, Appellants maintain Ap-pellees are not entitled to qualified immunity. Qualified or “good faith” immunity is an affirmative defense that must be pleaded by a defendant official. Harlow v. … In general, the doctrine of qualified immunity provides that government officials who perform discretionary functions are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established

Hoerman v. Western Heights Board of Education

913 P.2d 684 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 17, 1995

Qualified immunity shields public officials from suit insofar as the official’s conduct did not violate any clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … Thus, they did not violate clearly established law and are immune from suit in their individual capacities. McLin v.

Howell Ex Rel. Patterson v. City of Catoosa

729 F. Supp. 1308 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Jan 3, 1990

the law and that the law was clearly established when the violation occurred. … Qualified immunity “is an immunity from suit” rather than a mere defense to liability. Like absolute immunity, it is effectively lost if a case is erroneously permitted to go to trial. Powell v.

Adams v. Bouchard

591 F. Supp. 2d 1191 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Dec 4, 2008

Qualiñed Immunity Defendants have also moved for summary judgment on grounds of qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity is “an entitlement not to stand trial or face the other burdens of litigation” if the complained of behavior did not violate clearly established law. Mitchell v.

Powell v. Seay

553 P.2d 161 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Jul 27, 1976

But a district attorney's immunity as a quasi-judicial officer is not absolute but qualified. … Pachtman clearly holds only that a district attorney is absolutely immune if he is acting in his prosecutorial capacity.

KREMEIER v. TRANSITIONS, INC.

345 P.3d 1126 · Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · Oct 9, 2014

Hagley , 824 A.2d 107, 117 (Md. 2003) ("[N]egligence and lack of good faith are not equivalent," and "if good faith immunity can be overcome by establishing negligence, then good faith immunity is a meaningless concept as … Clearly, one may give "too much information" in good faith.

Langford v. GRADY COUNTY DETENTION CENTER

670 F. Supp. 2d 1213 · District Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Nov 17, 2009

Qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … In raising the qualified immunity defense, Defendants do not contend qualified immunity should be granted on grounds of lack of clearly established federal law.

Bjorklund v. Miller

779 F. Supp. 2d 1283 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Mar 15, 2011

The next question is whether any Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because their conduct did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … Miller may still be entitled to qualified immunity at this stage of the proceedings, however, if Plaintiffs alleged right was not “clearly established at the time official action was taken.” See Walker v.

Washington v. State ex rel. Department of Corrections

915 P.2d 359 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 16, 1996

Similarly, we note that the prison officials assert that they were entitled to qualified immunity. … However, once a defendant raises qualified immunity, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to come forward with facts which show that the defendant's alleged conduct violated the law and that the law was clearly established

Babb v. Eagleton

616 F. Supp. 2d 1195 · District Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Nov 5, 2007

This footnote limited Newcomb’s holding and labeled the Newcomb decision as establishing a form of “parental immunity” from suit. 6 The Heggy court further implied that such parental immunity is directly tied to a parent’ … Witt, 781 F.2d 155, 158 (9th Cir.1986) (holding that absolute immunity cannot attach to a quasi-judicial officer if his actions are “clearly and completely outside the scope of [his] jurisdiction”); Doe v.

Ellison v. Gray

702 P.2d 360 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Apr 30, 1985

Although ordinary work product is cloaked with a qualified immunity, it may be discovered upon a showing of the inability to secure the substantial equivalent of the materials without undue hardship. 4 The opinion work product … In Hickman , the court found that some documents were covered by a qualified immunity from discovery.

McNEELY v. STATE

422 P.3d 1272 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · May 24, 2018

Petitioner may be able to establish a factual basis for a Stand Your Ground defense; but she cannot establish a clear legal right to the relief of Stand Your Ground immunity from prosecution. Id . … Yet, the immunity created in section 1289.25 is a conditional immunity meaning that it applies only if certain factual elements are established. See, e.g., People v.

BENEDETTI v. CIMAREX ENERGY COMPANY

2018 OK 21 · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · Mar 13, 2018

Benedetti's principal employer and was statutorily immune from civil liability. Mr. … "The party seeking a statute's invalidation as unconstitutional has the burden to show the statute is clearly, palpably, and plainly inconsistent with the Constitution." Lafalier v. Lead-Impacted Cmtys.