5 Oklahoma opinions name it 2 courts 1992–2023 3 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oklahoma. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oklahoma. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Rogers v. Excise Bd. of Greer County
green
2 sentences2023Rogers v. Excise Bd. of Greer Cty ., 1984 OK 95, ¶ 14 , 701 P.2d 754, 761 . 2023Rogers v. Excise Bd. of Greer Cty ., 1984 OK 95, ¶ 14 , 701 P.2d 754, 761 . | 4 | 2002–2023 |
Grace Drilling Co. v. Director of Labor
green
2 sentences1992We adopt instead the holding of the Court of Appeals of Arkansas in a case nearly identical to No-votney on its facts, which involved Novot-ney’s employer, Grace Drilling Co. In Grace Drilling Co. v. Director of Labor, 31 Ark.App. 81 , 790 S.W.2d 907 (1990), the Court of Appeals of Arkansas held that Grace’s former employee’s failure to pass a drug test, without more, was a wilful violation of Grace’s rules, and disqualified the former employee from unemployment benefits. 1992We adopt instead the holding of the Court of Appeals of Arkansas in a case nearly identical to No-votney on its facts, which involved Novot-ney’s employer, Grace Drilling Co. In Grace Drilling Co. v. Director of Labor, 31 Ark.App. 81 , 790 S.W.2d 907 (1990), the Court of Appeals of Arkansas held that Grace’s former employee’s failure to pass a drug test, without more, was a wilful violation of Grace’s rules, and disqualified the former employee from unemployment benefits. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.