Tilly & Fitzgerald
What's New
Recent Court Decisions
Oklahoma Supreme Court
In Tulsa County Deputy v. Board of County Commissioners, 1998 OK 44, ___ P. 2d ___ (Okla. 1998), the Oklahoma Supreme Court held that the Tulsa County Criminal Justice Authority, a public trust designed to provide for the construction and operation of a new jail, was created under the proper statute. While Okla. Stat. tit. 19, §§904.1-904.10 do not authorize a trust with the authority to issue revenue bonds, Okla. Stat. tit. 60, §178 does provide for such a trust. Under the court’s rationale, Tulsa County was not limited to the title 19 jail trust authority; it was free to utilize any method provided by the legislature, including title 60 In In Re: Matter of Tax Levy of Ardmore, 1998 OK 43, ___ P. 2d ___ (Okla. 1998), the Oklahoma Supreme Court held that the state has the power to conduct a second election for a building levy that failed in the same year. The court stated that the constitutionally-granted power to hold an election for a school levy is self-executing and does not need legislation to carry it into effect. In addition, with both constitutional provisions and statutes, the court emphasized that the plain language of the provision or statute should be analyzed to ascertain legislative intent. In Williams v. Tulsa Motels, 1998 OK 42, ___ P. 2d ___ (Okla. 1998), the Oklahoma Supreme Court held that the Court of Civil Appeals should not have considered a fact not in dispute when reversing a summary judgment ruling. After the District Court granted summary judgment for the defendant, the Court of Civil Appeals reversed, basing its decision on a fact that the plaintiff had not relied on nor referred to in his brief in opposition to summary judgment. Because the fact was not in dispute, the Supreme Court held that summary judgment was proper. In Porter v. Ferrell, 1998 OK 41, ___ P. 2d ___ (Okla. 1998), the Oklahoma Supreme Court held that, by applying Okla. Stat. tit. 51 §24.1, a state employee who pleaded nolo contendre to a felony forfeited all benefits of employment. In the decision, the court vacated the decision of the Court of Civil Appeals, which held that the Oklahoma Personnel Act (Okla. Stat. tit. 74 §840-6.5) took precedence over §24.1. Stressing that harmony, not confusion, must be sought in statutory construction, the court ruled that the two statutes were compatible. In Drllvich v. Stock, 1998 OK 39, ___ P. 2d ___ (Okla. 1998), the Oklahoma Supreme Court held that when a foreign judgment is refiled in Oklahoma, Oklahoma’s dormancy statute (Okla. Stat. tit. 12 §735) does not bar recovery, and the refiling creates a new Oklahoma judgment which is governed by the Oklahoma statute of limitations. Citing cases from numerous states which followed this majority view, the court overruled its minority position concerning the Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act (Okla. Sta. tit. 12 §719). Matter of Guardianship of M.R.S., 1998 OK 38, ___ P. 2d ___ (Okla. 1998), the Oklahoma Supreme Court held that a father met the burden of proof required to regain custody of his daughter from her guardian. This case presented the court with the issue of the standard of proof required to terminate the guardianship of a minor. The father, who was never found unfit, need only show proof of changed circumstances which would allow him to provide a family home for the child. In reversing the trial court, which held that the father failed to prove substantial and material change by clear and convincing evidence, the court stressed a "parental preference" to place a child with its natural parents whenever possible. In Ethics Commission v. Keating, 1998 OK 36, ___ P. 2d ___ (Okla. 1998), the Oklahoma Supreme Court held that Oklahoma law permits the Governor to use state-owned vehicles for transportation to fundraisers. Although the Ethics Commission rule prohibiting use of public property in solicitation of funds does appear to apply, an exception to that rule, allowing transportation for activities that are a part of the ordinary conduct of the governmental entity, is also applicable. Furthermore, an overriding statute (Okla. Stat. tit. 47, §2-101) indicates no limitation upon the Governor’s use of public transportation to attend fundraising events. In Mills v. Grotheer, 1998 OK 33, ___ P. 2d ___ (Okla. 1998), a medical malpractice case, the Oklahoma Supreme Court held that the trial court had not abused its discretion by not admitting evidence of an expert’s membership in the defendant’s medical malpractice insurance company. By adopting the "connections test", the court ruled that an expert must have more connection with a defendant’s insurance company than a mere policy or membership in order for the evidence to be admissible. The rationale for such holding was that the defendant’s expert did not have any direct financial interest in the outcome, such as an agent or employee of the company would. In Gaylord Entertainment v. Thompson, 1998 OK 30, ___ P. 2d ___ (Okla. 1998), the Oklahoma Supreme Court held that the constitutional shield surrounding the freedom of political speech protected a newspaper from the burden of defending themselves against claims of libel by the plaintiffs, and, thus, the case was properly dismissed. Furthermore, the court held that the privilege of fair-report (Okla. Stat. tit. 12, §1443.1) protected newspaper editorial coverage of lawmaking already in progress. In its opinion, the court emphasized the importance of political speech, stating that it must be more intensely guarded than any other form of permissible expression. Media coverage and discussion of issues of governmental interest allow the public to make informed decisions, and this is essential for an effective democracy.