controversy claim (Oklahoma) · Go Syfert
← Oklahoma issues

controversy claim in Oklahoma

16 Oklahoma opinions name it 3 courts 1940–2024 4 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 (5)

CaseFollowedCited
Gordon v. Followellgreen
okla · 1964 · cited in 9 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 1983–2017
2 sentences

2014"A determination of rights, status, or other legal relations may be obtained by means of a pleading seeking that relief alone or as incident to or part of a petition, counterclaim, or other pleading seeking other relief...." 12 0.8.2011 § 1652. 120 The proof required for the Counties to establish their right to pursue declaratory relief is set out in Gordon v. Followell, 1964 OK 74, ¶ 8 , 391 P.2d 242 , 245: The requisite precedent facts or conditions which the courts generally hold must exist in order that declaratory relief may be obtained may be summarized as follows: (1) there must exist a

2014"A determination of rights, status, or other legal relations may be obtained by means of a pleading seeking that relief alone or as incident to or part of a petition, counterclaim, or other pleading seeking other relief...." 12 0.8.2011 § 1652. 120 The proof required for the Counties to establish their right to pursue declaratory relief is set out in Gordon v. Followell, 1964 OK 74, ¶ 8 , 391 P.2d 242 , 245: The requisite precedent facts or conditions which the courts generally hold must exist in order that declaratory relief may be obtained may be summarized as follows: (1) there must exist a

59
Brison v. Stategreen
oklacrimapp · 1986 · cited in 4 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 2024–2024
2 sentences

2024The statutory language giving rise to this controversy is the rule that the proponent of such evidence must generally provide "advance written notice" of the intent to offer it to provide the affected party a fair opportunity to contest the use of such evidence. 2 See also Rushing v. State, 1984 OK CR 39, ¶¶ 57-60 , 676 P.2d 842, 852-53 (holding admission of stale conviction to impeach defense witness without prior notice and proper findings was error, but harmless); Brison v. State , 1986 OK CR 183, ¶¶ 8-10 , 730 P.2d 537, 538-39 (impeachment by stale convictions without proper notice and fin

2024The statutory language giving rise to this controversy is the rule that the proponent of such evidence must generally provide "advance written notice" of the intent to offer it to provide the affected party a fair opportunity to contest the use of such evidence. 2 See also Rushing v. State, 1984 OK CR 39, ¶¶ 57-60 , 676 P.2d 842, 852-53 (holding admission of stale conviction to impeach defense witness without prior notice and proper findings was error, but harmless); Brison v. State , 1986 OK CR 183, ¶¶ 8-10 , 730 P.2d 537, 538-39 (impeachment by stale convictions without proper notice and fin

44
Rushing v. Stategreen
oklacrimapp · 1984 · cited in 4 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 2024–2024
2 sentences

2024The statutory language giving rise to this controversy is the rule that the proponent of such evidence must generally provide "advance written notice" of the intent to offer it to provide the affected party a fair opportunity to contest the use of such evidence. 2 See also Rushing v. State, 1984 OK CR 39, ¶¶ 57-60 , 676 P.2d 842, 852-53 (holding admission of stale conviction to impeach defense witness without prior notice and proper findings was error, but harmless); Brison v. State , 1986 OK CR 183, ¶¶ 8-10 , 730 P.2d 537, 538-39 (impeachment by stale convictions without proper notice and fin

2024The statutory language giving rise to this controversy is the rule that the proponent of such evidence must generally provide "advance written notice" of the intent to offer it to provide the affected party a fair opportunity to contest the use of such evidence. 2 See also Rushing v. State, 1984 OK CR 39, ¶¶ 57-60 , 676 P.2d 842, 852-53 (holding admission of stale conviction to impeach defense witness without prior notice and proper findings was error, but harmless); Brison v. State , 1986 OK CR 183, ¶¶ 8-10 , 730 P.2d 537, 538-39 (impeachment by stale convictions without proper notice and fin

44
KNIGHT EX REL. ELLIS v. Millergreen
okla · 2008 · cited in 4 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
2 sentences

2017Ellis v. Miller, 2008 OK 81 , 195 P.3d 372 , this Court set forth the requirements for standing under the Oklahoma Declaratory Judgment Act: The requisite precedent facts or conditions which the courts, generally hold must exist in order that declaratory relief may be obtained may be summarized as follows: (1) there must exist a justiciable controversy; that is to say, a controversy in which a claim of right is asserted against one who has an interest in contesting it; (2) - the controversy must be between persons whose interests are adverse; (3) the party seeking declaratory relief must have

2017Ellis v. Miller, 2008 OK 81 , 195 P.3d 372 , this Court set forth the requirements for standing under the Oklahoma Declaratory Judgment Act: The requisite precedent facts or conditions which the courts, generally hold must exist in order that declaratory relief may be obtained may be summarized as follows: (1) there must exist a justiciable controversy; that is to say, a controversy in which a claim of right is asserted against one who has an interest in contesting it; (2) - the controversy must be between persons whose interests are adverse; (3) the party seeking declaratory relief must have

14
Chrysler Corp. v. Clarkgreen
okla · 1987 · cited in 2 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015
2 sentences

2015Chrysler Corp. v. Clark, 1987 OK 32 , 737 P.2d 109, 110 , quoting Gordon v. Followell, 1964 OK 74 , 391 P.2d 242, 244 .

2015Chrysler Corp. v. Clark, 1987 OK 32 , 737 P.2d 109, 110 , quoting Gordon v. Followell, 1964 OK 74 , 391 P.2d 242, 244 .

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 (5)

CaseCitedYears
Kress v. Corey green
nev · 1948
2 sentences

1983In the case of Gordon v. Followell, Okl., 391 P.2d 242 (244) (1964) this Court quoted with approval from Kress v. Corey, 65 Nev. 1 , 189 P.2d 352 (which case in turn quoted Borchard on Declaratory Judgments): “The requisite precedent facts or conditions which the courts generally hold must exist in order that declaratory relief may be obtained may be summarized as follows: (1) there must exist a justiciable controversy; that is to say, a controversy in which a claim of right is asserted against one who has an interest in contesting it; (2) the controversy must be between persons whose interest

1983In the case of Gordon v. Followell, Okl., 391 P.2d 242 (244) (1964) this Court quoted with approval from Kress v. Corey, 65 Nev. 1 , 189 P.2d 352 (which case in turn quoted Borchard on Declaratory Judgments): “The requisite precedent facts or conditions which the courts generally hold must exist in order that declaratory relief may be obtained may be summarized as follows: (1) there must exist a justiciable controversy; that is to say, a controversy in which a claim of right is asserted against one who has an interest in contesting it; (2) the controversy must be between persons whose interest

11983–1983
Ferk v. Hall neutral
okla · 1926
2 sentences

1983In the case of Gordon v. Followell, Okl., 391 P.2d 242 (244) (1964) this Court quoted with approval from Kress v. Corey, 65 Nev. 1 , 189 P.2d 352 (which case in turn quoted Borchard on Declaratory Judgments): “The requisite precedent facts or conditions which the courts generally hold must exist in order that declaratory relief may be obtained may be summarized as follows: (1) there must exist a justiciable controversy; that is to say, a controversy in which a claim of right is asserted against one who has an interest in contesting it; (2) the controversy must be between persons whose interest

1983In the case of Gordon v. Followell, Okl., 391 P.2d 242 (244) (1964) this Court quoted with approval from Kress v. Corey, 65 Nev. 1 , 189 P.2d 352 (which case in turn quoted Borchard on Declaratory Judgments): “The requisite precedent facts or conditions which the courts generally hold must exist in order that declaratory relief may be obtained may be summarized as follows: (1) there must exist a justiciable controversy; that is to say, a controversy in which a claim of right is asserted against one who has an interest in contesting it; (2) the controversy must be between persons whose interest

11983–1983
Long v. Towl green
mo · 1868
1 sentence

1940(Citing cases.)” *299 In the body of the opinion in the case of Coates v. Frst National Bank & Trust Co., 176 Okla. 322 , 55 P. 2d 441 , appears the following: “And from Long v. Towl, 42 Mo. 545 : “ ‘Dismissal of suits palpably unjust forms no adequate consideration for a promise. * * * to make the settlement of assumed rights a sufficient consideration for a promise, there must be at least an appearance of right sufficient to raise a possible doubt in favor of the party asserting the claim.’ ” In the case of Harden v. Harden, 201 Ky. 310 , 256 S. W. 417 , 38 A.L.R. 756 , it was said: “Hence,

11940–1940
Coates v. First Nat. Bank & Trust Co. neutral
okla · 1936
2 sentences

1940(Citing cases.)” *299 In the body of the opinion in the case of Coates v. Frst National Bank & Trust Co., 176 Okla. 322 , 55 P. 2d 441 , appears the following: “And from Long v. Towl, 42 Mo. 545 : “ ‘Dismissal of suits palpably unjust forms no adequate consideration for a promise. * * * to make the settlement of assumed rights a sufficient consideration for a promise, there must be at least an appearance of right sufficient to raise a possible doubt in favor of the party asserting the claim.’ ” In the case of Harden v. Harden, 201 Ky. 310 , 256 S. W. 417 , 38 A.L.R. 756 , it was said: “Hence,

1940(Citing cases.)” *299 In the body of the opinion in the case of Coates v. Frst National Bank & Trust Co., 176 Okla. 322 , 55 P. 2d 441 , appears the following: “And from Long v. Towl, 42 Mo. 545 : “ ‘Dismissal of suits palpably unjust forms no adequate consideration for a promise. * * * to make the settlement of assumed rights a sufficient consideration for a promise, there must be at least an appearance of right sufficient to raise a possible doubt in favor of the party asserting the claim.’ ” In the case of Harden v. Harden, 201 Ky. 310 , 256 S. W. 417 , 38 A.L.R. 756 , it was said: “Hence,

11940–1940
Hardin's Administrators v. Hardin neutral
kyctapp · 1923
2 sentences

1940(Citing cases.)” *299 In the body of the opinion in the case of Coates v. Frst National Bank & Trust Co., 176 Okla. 322 , 55 P. 2d 441 , appears the following: “And from Long v. Towl, 42 Mo. 545 : “ ‘Dismissal of suits palpably unjust forms no adequate consideration for a promise. * * * to make the settlement of assumed rights a sufficient consideration for a promise, there must be at least an appearance of right sufficient to raise a possible doubt in favor of the party asserting the claim.’ ” In the case of Harden v. Harden, 201 Ky. 310 , 256 S. W. 417 , 38 A.L.R. 756 , it was said: “Hence,

1940(Citing cases.)” *299 In the body of the opinion in the case of Coates v. Frst National Bank & Trust Co., 176 Okla. 322 , 55 P. 2d 441 , appears the following: “And from Long v. Towl, 42 Mo. 545 : “ ‘Dismissal of suits palpably unjust forms no adequate consideration for a promise. * * * to make the settlement of assumed rights a sufficient consideration for a promise, there must be at least an appearance of right sufficient to raise a possible doubt in favor of the party asserting the claim.’ ” In the case of Harden v. Harden, 201 Ky. 310 , 256 S. W. 417 , 38 A.L.R. 756 , it was said: “Hence,

11940–1940

Statutes the citing opinions construe

OK § Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 1651 (5) OK § Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 2609 (4) OK § Okla. Stat. tit. 20, § 3001.1 (4) OK § Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 1541.2 (4) OK § Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 421 (4) OK § Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 1053 (4) OK § Okla. Stat. tit. 22, § 2002 (4)

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.

Where else courts name it

NJ 361 (1967–2026) DE 47 (1952–2026) WI 38 (1953–2026) TX 30 (1880–2022) IL 25 (1913–2025) CA 21 (1895–2025) OK 16 (1940–2024) MI 14 (1932–2018) NV 12 (1948–2022) AR 11 (1947–2016) NY 11 (1873–2025) FL 8 (1957–2024) ND 7 (1948–2017) VA 7 (2007–2024) IA 6 (1916–1978) NC 6 (1984–2013) WA 6 (1903–2018) MA 6 (1943–2014) NM 6 (1978–2022) LA 5 (1946–2019) MD 5 (2004–2025) OR 5 (1908–2000) AL 5 (1909–1997) SD 5 (1995–2025) WV 5 (1945–2014) IN 4 (2000–2008) OH 3 (1978–2004) PA 3 (1953–2018) UT 3 (1996–2020) GA 3 (1925–2019) RI 3 (1992–2007) WY 2 (2005–2019) NH 2 (1841–2019) MS 2 (2001–2003) ME 2 (2004–2017) TN 2 (1946–1968) CO 2 (1942–1960) KS 2 (1915–1991) AZ 2 (1988–1989)

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