Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
33 Oklahoma opinions name it 2 courts 2003–2022 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Copeland v. Lodge Enterprises, Inc.green2 sentences2022The appellate court has "an affirmative duty to test all evidentiary material tendered in summary process for its legal sufficiency to support the relief sought by the movant." Copeland v. The Lodge Enters., Inc. , 2000 OK 36, ¶ 8 , 4 P.3d 695 . 2022The appellate court has "an affirmative duty to test all evidentiary material tendered in summary process for its legal sufficiency to support the relief sought by the movant." Copeland v. The Lodge Enters., Inc. , 2000 OK 36, ¶ 8 , 4 P.3d 695 . | 2 | 21 |
State v. Tategreen2 sentences2020Parris v. Limes, 2012 OK 18, ¶ 12, 277 P.3d 1259 (citations omitted). ¶20 This appeal also raises issues of statutory construction that similarly present a question of law, State v. Tate , 2012 OK 31, ¶ 7, 276 P.3d 1017, and, consequently, require a de novo review standard, Kluver v. Weatherford Hosp. 2020Parris v. Limes, 2012 OK 18, ¶ 12, 277 P.3d 1259 (citations omitted). ¶20 This appeal also raises issues of statutory construction that similarly present a question of law, State v. Tate , 2012 OK 31, ¶ 7, 276 P.3d 1017, and, consequently, require a de novo review standard, Kluver v. Weatherford Hosp. | 1 | 1 |
Parris v. LIMESgreen2 sentences2020Parris v. Limes, 2012 OK 18, ¶ 12, 277 P.3d 1259 (citations omitted). ¶20 This appeal also raises issues of statutory construction that similarly present a question of law, State v. Tate , 2012 OK 31, ¶ 7, 276 P.3d 1017, and, consequently, require a de novo review standard, Kluver v. Weatherford Hosp. 2020Parris v. Limes, 2012 OK 18, ¶ 12, 277 P.3d 1259 (citations omitted). ¶20 This appeal also raises issues of statutory construction that similarly present a question of law, State v. Tate , 2012 OK 31, ¶ 7, 276 P.3d 1017, and, consequently, require a de novo review standard, Kluver v. Weatherford Hosp. | 1 | 1 |
Fulsom v. Fulsomgreen2 sentences2014Fulsom v. Fulsom , 2003 OK 96, ¶ 2, 81 P.3d 652, 654. 2014Fulsom v. Fulsom , 2003 OK 96, ¶ 2, 81 P.3d 652, 654. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oklahoma. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Manley v. Brown
green
2 sentences2015Like the trial court, "appellate tribunals must equally bear an affirmative duty to test all evidentiary material tendered in summary process for its legal sufficiency to support the relief sought by the movant." Id. 2014Like the trial court, "appellate tribunals must equally bear an affirmative duty to test all evidentiary material tendered in summary process for its legal sufficiency to support the relief sought by the movant." Id. | 7 | 2003–2015 |
Copeland v. Tela Corp.
green
2 sentences2010Copeland, 1999 OK 81 at ¶ 4 , 996 P.2d at 933 . ¶22 Both the trial court and reviewing appellate court bear an affirmative duty to test all evidentiary material tendered in the summary process for its legal sufficiency to support the relief sought by the moving party. 2010Copeland, 1999 OK 81 at ¶ 4 , 996 P.2d at 933 . ¶22 Both the trial court and reviewing appellate court bear an affirmative duty to test all evidentiary material tendered in the summary process for its legal sufficiency to support the relief sought by the moving party. | 2 | 2010–2010 |
Polymer Fabricating, Inc. v. Employers Workers' Compensation Ass'n
green
2 sentences2008Id. 2008Id. | 2 | 2008–2008 |
Lewis v. Wal-Mart Stores East, L.P.
green
2 sentences2018"This Court bears 'an affirmative duty to test all evidentiary material tendered in summary process for its legal sufficiency to support the relief sought by the movant.'" Lewis v. Wal-Mart Stores East, L.P. , 2009 OK CIV APP 81, ¶ 4 , 225 P.3d 6 (quoting Copeland v. The Lodge Enters., Inc. , 2000 OK 36, ¶ 8 , 4 P.3d 695 ). ¶26 An appeal from an order granting summary judgment is subject to de novo review. 2018"This Court bears 'an affirmative duty to test all evidentiary material tendered in summary process for its legal sufficiency to support the relief sought by the movant.'" Lewis v. Wal-Mart Stores East, L.P. , 2009 OK CIV APP 81, ¶ 4 , 225 P.3d 6 (quoting Copeland v. The Lodge Enters., Inc. , 2000 OK 36, ¶ 8 , 4 P.3d 695 ). ¶26 An appeal from an order granting summary judgment is subject to de novo review. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Shull v. Reid
green
2 sentences2018Shull v. Reid , 2011 OK 72, ¶ 3 , 258 P.3d 521 . 2018Shull v. Reid , 2011 OK 72, ¶ 3 , 258 P.3d 521 . | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Murray County v. Homesales, Inc.
green
1 sentence2015(Emphasis added.) Thus, as the movant for summary judgment advocating for application of Kentucky law to interpret the CGL Policy at issue in this contract action filed in Oklahoma, Insurer has the burden under $ 162 and Harvell to demonstrate the CGL policy does not identify "where it is to be performed," i.e., lacks a choice of law provision and/or Insurer and KBC did not otherwise agree to or "indicate a place of performance." 8 T27 When reviewing an order granting a motion for summary judgment, this Court "bears an affirmative duty to test all evidentiary material tendered in summary proce | 1 | 2015–2015 |
MURRAY COUNTY v. HOMESALES, INC.
green
1 sentence2015(Emphasis added.) Thus, as the movant for summary judgment advocating for application of Kentucky law to interpret the CGL Policy at issue in this contract action filed in Oklahoma, Insurer has the burden under $ 162 and Harvell to demonstrate the CGL policy does not identify "where it is to be performed," i.e., lacks a choice of law provision and/or Insurer and KBC did not otherwise agree to or "indicate a place of performance." 8 T27 When reviewing an order granting a motion for summary judgment, this Court "bears an affirmative duty to test all evidentiary material tendered in summary proce | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Liddell v. Heavner
green
2 sentences2009Just as trial courts "are called upon to do in deciding whether summary relief is warranted in the first instance, so also do appellate tribunals bear an affirmative duty to test for its legal sufficiency all evidentiary material received in summary process as support for the relief granted." Liddell v. Heavner, 2008 OK 6, ¶ 7 , 180 P.3d 1191, 1196 . 2009Just as trial courts "are called upon to do in deciding whether summary relief is warranted in the first instance, so also do appellate tribunals bear an affirmative duty to test for its legal sufficiency all evidentiary material received in summary process as support for the relief granted." Liddell v. Heavner, 2008 OK 6, ¶ 7 , 180 P.3d 1191, 1196 . | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Carmichael v. Beller
green
1 sentence2003Id. {15 This Court bears "an affirmative duty to test all evidentiary material tendered in summary process for its legal sufficiency to support the relief sought by the movant." Copeland v. The Lodge Enters., Inc., 2000 OK 36, 18 , 4 P.3d 695, 699 . | 1 | 2003–2003 |
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.