permit violation (Oklahoma) · Go Syfert
← Oklahoma issues

permit violation in Oklahoma

5 Oklahoma opinions name it 2 courts 1934–2017 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Oklahoma courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (6)

CaseFollowedCited
In Re Initiative Petition No. 379green
okla · 2006 · cited in 2 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
2 sentences

2017In McCurley , the Court explained the permit was in violation of an ordinance, the permittee possessed constructive knowledge the permit was in violation of the ordinance, and permittee's position was substantially unchanged since the construction permittee had undertaken was limited to "four or five men" doing "a half day's work." Id . 280 P. at 472 . 62 Bankoff v. Board of Adjustment of Wagoner County , 1994 OK 58, n.9 , 875 P.2d 1138, 1143 , citing, Burdick v. Independent School , 1985 OK 49 , 702 P.2d 48 (If the facts and circumstances implicate a prevailing public interest, the case will

2017In McCurley , the Court explained the permit was in violation of an ordinance, the permittee possessed constructive knowledge the permit was in violation of the ordinance, and permittee's position was substantially unchanged since the construction permittee had undertaken was limited to "four or five men" doing "a half day's work." Id . 280 P. at 472 . 62 Bankoff v. Board of Adjustment of Wagoner County , 1994 OK 58, n.9 , 875 P.2d 1138, 1143 , citing, Burdick v. Independent School , 1985 OK 49 , 702 P.2d 48 (If the facts and circumstances implicate a prevailing public interest, the case will

22
Rose Brothers, Inc. v. City of Alvagreen
okla · 1960 · cited in 2 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
2 sentences

2017In McCurley , the Court explained the permit was in violation of an ordinance, the permittee possessed constructive knowledge the permit was in violation of the ordinance, and permittee's position was substantially unchanged since the construction permittee had undertaken was limited to "four or five men" doing "a half day's work." Id . 280 P. at 472 . 62 Bankoff v. Board of Adjustment of Wagoner County , 1994 OK 58, n.9 , 875 P.2d 1138, 1143 , citing, Burdick v. Independent School , 1985 OK 49 , 702 P.2d 48 (If the facts and circumstances implicate a prevailing public interest, the case will

2017In McCurley , the Court explained the permit was in violation of an ordinance, the permittee possessed constructive knowledge the permit was in violation of the ordinance, and permittee's position was substantially unchanged since the construction permittee had undertaken was limited to "four or five men" doing "a half day's work." Id . 280 P. at 472 . 62 Bankoff v. Board of Adjustment of Wagoner County , 1994 OK 58, n.9 , 875 P.2d 1138, 1143 , citing, Burdick v. Independent School , 1985 OK 49 , 702 P.2d 48 (If the facts and circumstances implicate a prevailing public interest, the case will

12
Bankoff v. Board of Adjustmentgreen
okla · 1994 · cited in 2 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
2 sentences

2017In McCurley , the Court explained the permit was in violation of an ordinance, the permittee possessed constructive knowledge the permit was in violation of the ordinance, and permittee's position was substantially unchanged since the construction permittee had undertaken was limited to "four or five men" doing "a half day's work." Id . 280 P. at 472 . 62 Bankoff v. Board of Adjustment of Wagoner County , 1994 OK 58, n.9 , 875 P.2d 1138, 1143 , citing, Burdick v. Independent School , 1985 OK 49 , 702 P.2d 48 (If the facts and circumstances implicate a prevailing public interest, the case will

2017In McCurley , the Court explained the permit was in violation of an ordinance, the permittee possessed constructive knowledge the permit was in violation of the ordinance, and permittee's position was substantially unchanged since the construction permittee had undertaken was limited to "four or five men" doing "a half day's work." Id . 280 P. at 472 . 62 Bankoff v. Board of Adjustment of Wagoner County , 1994 OK 58, n.9 , 875 P.2d 1138, 1143 , citing, Burdick v. Independent School , 1985 OK 49 , 702 P.2d 48 (If the facts and circumstances implicate a prevailing public interest, the case will

12
City of Enid v. Warner-Quinlan Asphalt Co.green
· 1916 · cited in 2 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
2 sentences

2017In McCurley , the Court explained the permit was in violation of an ordinance, the permittee possessed constructive knowledge the permit was in violation of the ordinance, and permittee's position was substantially unchanged since the construction permittee had undertaken was limited to "four or five men" doing "a half day's work." Id . 280 P. at 472 . 62 Bankoff v. Board of Adjustment of Wagoner County , 1994 OK 58, n.9 , 875 P.2d 1138, 1143 , citing, Burdick v. Independent School , 1985 OK 49 , 702 P.2d 48 (If the facts and circumstances implicate a prevailing public interest, the case will

2017In McCurley , the Court explained the permit was in violation of an ordinance, the permittee possessed constructive knowledge the permit was in violation of the ordinance, and permittee's position was substantially unchanged since the construction permittee had undertaken was limited to "four or five men" doing "a half day's work." Id . 280 P. at 472 . 62 Bankoff v. Board of Adjustment of Wagoner County , 1994 OK 58, n.9 , 875 P.2d 1138, 1143 , citing, Burdick v. Independent School , 1985 OK 49 , 702 P.2d 48 (If the facts and circumstances implicate a prevailing public interest, the case will

12
Cochran v. Norrisgreen
okla · 1935 · cited in 2 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
2 sentences

2017In McCurley , the Court explained the permit was in violation of an ordinance, the permittee possessed constructive knowledge the permit was in violation of the ordinance, and permittee's position was substantially unchanged since the construction permittee had undertaken was limited to "four or five men" doing "a half day's work." Id . 280 P. at 472 . 62 Bankoff v. Board of Adjustment of Wagoner County , 1994 OK 58, n.9 , 875 P.2d 1138, 1143 , citing, Burdick v. Independent School , 1985 OK 49 , 702 P.2d 48 (If the facts and circumstances implicate a prevailing public interest, the case will

2017In McCurley , the Court explained the permit was in violation of an ordinance, the permittee possessed constructive knowledge the permit was in violation of the ordinance, and permittee's position was substantially unchanged since the construction permittee had undertaken was limited to "four or five men" doing "a half day's work." Id . 280 P. at 472 . 62 Bankoff v. Board of Adjustment of Wagoner County , 1994 OK 58, n.9 , 875 P.2d 1138, 1143 , citing, Burdick v. Independent School , 1985 OK 49 , 702 P.2d 48 (If the facts and circumstances implicate a prevailing public interest, the case will

12
McCurley v. City of El Renogreen
okla · 1929 · cited in 2 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
2 sentences

2017In McCurley , the Court explained the permit was in violation of an ordinance, the permittee possessed constructive knowledge the permit was in violation of the ordinance, and permittee's position was substantially unchanged since the construction permittee had undertaken was limited to "four or five men" doing "a half day's work." Id . 280 P. at 472 . 62 Bankoff v. Board of Adjustment of Wagoner County , 1994 OK 58, n.9 , 875 P.2d 1138, 1143 , citing, Burdick v. Independent School , 1985 OK 49 , 702 P.2d 48 (If the facts and circumstances implicate a prevailing public interest, the case will

2017In McCurley , the Court explained the permit was in violation of an ordinance, the permittee possessed constructive knowledge the permit was in violation of the ordinance, and permittee's position was substantially unchanged since the construction permittee had undertaken was limited to "four or five men" doing "a half day's work." Id . 280 P. at 472. 62 Bankoff v. Board of Adjustment of Wagoner County , 1994 OK 58, n.9, 875 P.2d 1138, 1143, citing, Burdick v. Independent School , 1985 OK 49, 702 P.2d 48 (If the facts and circumstances implicate a prevailing public interest, the case will exce

12

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oklahoma. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (7)

CaseCitedYears
Burdick v. Independent School District No. 52 green
okla · 1985
2 sentences

2017In McCurley , the Court explained the permit was in violation of an ordinance, the permittee possessed constructive knowledge the permit was in violation of the ordinance, and permittee's position was substantially unchanged since the construction permittee had undertaken was limited to "four or five men" doing "a half day's work." Id . 280 P. at 472 . 62 Bankoff v. Board of Adjustment of Wagoner County , 1994 OK 58, n.9 , 875 P.2d 1138, 1143 , citing, Burdick v. Independent School , 1985 OK 49 , 702 P.2d 48 (If the facts and circumstances implicate a prevailing public interest, the case will

2017In McCurley , the Court explained the permit was in violation of an ordinance, the permittee possessed constructive knowledge the permit was in violation of the ordinance, and permittee's position was substantially unchanged since the construction permittee had undertaken was limited to "four or five men" doing "a half day's work." Id . 280 P. at 472. 62 Bankoff v. Board of Adjustment of Wagoner County , 1994 OK 58, n.9, 875 P.2d 1138, 1143, citing, Burdick v. Independent School , 1985 OK 49, 702 P.2d 48 (If the facts and circumstances implicate a prevailing public interest, the case will exce

22017–2017
General Motors Corp. v. Oklahoma County Board of Equalization green
okla · 1983
2 sentences

2017In McCurley , the Court explained the permit was in violation of an ordinance, the permittee possessed constructive knowledge the permit was in violation of the ordinance, and permittee's position was substantially unchanged since the construction permittee had undertaken was limited to "four or five men" doing "a half day's work." Id . 280 P. at 472 . 62 Bankoff v. Board of Adjustment of Wagoner County , 1994 OK 58, n.9 , 875 P.2d 1138, 1143 , citing, Burdick v. Independent School , 1985 OK 49 , 702 P.2d 48 (If the facts and circumstances implicate a prevailing public interest, the case will

2017In McCurley , the Court explained the permit was in violation of an ordinance, the permittee possessed constructive knowledge the permit was in violation of the ordinance, and permittee's position was substantially unchanged since the construction permittee had undertaken was limited to "four or five men" doing "a half day's work." Id . 280 P. at 472. 62 Bankoff v. Board of Adjustment of Wagoner County , 1994 OK 58, n.9, 875 P.2d 1138, 1143, citing, Burdick v. Independent School , 1985 OK 49, 702 P.2d 48 (If the facts and circumstances implicate a prevailing public interest, the case will exce

22017–2017
General Motors Corp. v. Oklahoma County Board of Equalization green
scotus · 1984
2 sentences

2017In McCurley , the Court explained the permit was in violation of an ordinance, the permittee possessed constructive knowledge the permit was in violation of the ordinance, and permittee's position was substantially unchanged since the construction permittee had undertaken was limited to "four or five men" doing "a half day's work." Id . 280 P. at 472 . 62 Bankoff v. Board of Adjustment of Wagoner County , 1994 OK 58, n.9 , 875 P.2d 1138, 1143 , citing, Burdick v. Independent School , 1985 OK 49 , 702 P.2d 48 (If the facts and circumstances implicate a prevailing public interest, the case will

2017In McCurley , the Court explained the permit was in violation of an ordinance, the permittee possessed constructive knowledge the permit was in violation of the ordinance, and permittee's position was substantially unchanged since the construction permittee had undertaken was limited to "four or five men" doing "a half day's work." Id . 280 P. at 472 . 62 Bankoff v. Board of Adjustment of Wagoner County , 1994 OK 58, n.9 , 875 P.2d 1138, 1143 , citing, Burdick v. Independent School , 1985 OK 49 , 702 P.2d 48 (If the facts and circumstances implicate a prevailing public interest, the case will

22017–2017
Sadler v. Board of Com'rs of Mayes County neutral
okla · 1933
2 sentences

1936In unplatted tracts no well shall be drilled or put down upon any block or tract of less than 5 acres in area, and in platted tracts no such well shall be drilled or put down upon any block of less than 2% acres in area, except as otherwise provided. * * *” In the case of Anderson-Kerr, Inc., v. Van Meter, 162 Okla. 176 , 19 P. (2d) 1068 , this court held that there are four requirements which must be met before there is authority to grant a permit as an exception to the terms of the above ordinance.

1934Anderson-Kerr, Inc., v. Van Meter, 162 Okla. 176 , 19 P. (2d) 1068 .

21934–1936
Anderson-Kerr, Inc. v. Van Meter neutral
okla · 1933
2 sentences

1936In unplatted tracts no well shall be drilled or put down upon any block or tract of less than 5 acres in area, and in platted tracts no such well shall be drilled or put down upon any block of less than 2% acres in area, except as otherwise provided. * * *” In the case of Anderson-Kerr, Inc., v. Van Meter, 162 Okla. 176 , 19 P. (2d) 1068 , this court held that there are four requirements which must be met before there is authority to grant a permit as an exception to the terms of the above ordinance.

1934Anderson-Kerr, Inc., v. Van Meter, 162 Okla. 176 , 19 P. (2d) 1068 .

21934–1936
E. I. Du Pont De Nemours Powder Co. v. Dodson green
okla · 1915
1 sentence

1997Du Pont de Nemours Powder Company v. Dodson, 150 P. at 1087 . ¶ 19 However, the Court held that the permit did not bar a suit for damages under Section 23: [W]hilst the Legislature may legalize an act which might otherwise be a nuisance, it cannot authorize the taking or damaging of private property. . . .

11997–1997
Van Meter v. H. F. Wilcox Oil & Gas Co. green
okla · 1935
2 sentences

1936In the case of Van Meter v. Wilcox Oil & Gas Co., 170 Okla. 604 , 41 P. (2d) 904 , this court considered a number of the applicable authorities.

1936In the case of Van Meter v. Wilcox Oil & Gas Co., 170 Okla. 604 , 41 P. (2d) 904 , this court considered a number of the applicable authorities.

11936–1936

Where else courts name it

CA 66 (1894–2023) CT 61 (1965–2026) TX 34 (1935–2017) NY 33 (1927–2019) IL 23 (1910–2025) NJ 21 (1956–2026) VT 13 (1998–2026) MA 13 (1945–2021) WA 12 (1985–2023) WI 11 (1963–2016) MI 11 (1957–2026) PA 11 (1941–2021) FL 10 (1938–2021) OR 9 (1929–2025) AR 8 (1951–2012) ND 8 (1977–2019) MN 8 (1979–2016) MD 8 (2001–2026) CO 7 (1972–2025) IN 7 (1926–2019) UT 6 (2013–2018) NH 6 (1952–2012) AZ 6 (1976–2020) NC 6 (1972–2020) IA 6 (1930–2026) ME 5 (2000–2012) OH 5 (1982–2014) OK 5 (1934–2017) HI 4 (2006–2018) MO 4 (1981–2021) LA 4 (1976–2023) SD 4 (2013–2022) TN 3 (1940–2006) DC 3 (1990–2017) NM 3 (1980–2009) GA 3 (1981–2011) KY 3 (1928–2018) WV 3 (1997–2015) SC 3 (1998–2018) VA 3 (1967–2001) AL 3 (1973–1995) NE 2 (1970–2025) WY 2 (1983–1985)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check