employment doctrine (Oklahoma) · Go Syfert
← Oklahoma issues

employment doctrine in Oklahoma

10 Oklahoma opinions name it 1 courts 1944–2014 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
Burk v. K-Mart Corp.green
okla · 1989 · cited in 6 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 1996–2014
2 sentences

2014Comments This Instruction is based on the public policy exception to the employment at will doctrine that was recognized in Vannerson v. Board of Regents of the Univ of Oklahoma , 1989 OK 125, 784 P.2d 1053 (Okla. 1989) ; Burk v. K-Mart Corp. , 1989 OK 22, ¶¶ 17-20, 770 P.2d 24, 28-29 (Okla. 1989) ; and Hinson v. Cameron , 1987 OK 49, ¶ 10, 742 P.2d 549, 552-53 (Okla. 1987) .

2014Comments This Instruction is based on the public policy exception to the employment at will doctrine that was recognized in Vannerson v. Board of Regents of the Univ of Oklahoma , 1989 OK 125, 784 P.2d 1053 (Okla. 1989) ; Burk v. K-Mart Corp. , 1989 OK 22, ¶¶ 17-20, 770 P.2d 24, 28-29 (Okla. 1989) ; and Hinson v. Cameron , 1987 OK 49, ¶ 10, 742 P.2d 549, 552-53 (Okla. 1987) .

46
Vigil v. Arzolagreen
nmctapp · 1983 · cited in 2 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014
2 sentences

2014See Burk v. K-Mart Corp ., 1989 OK 22, ¶ 14 , 770 P.2d 24, 28 (citing Vigil v. Arzola , 699 P.2d 613 (N.M.

2014See Burk v. K-Mart Corp ., 1989 OK 22, ¶ 14 , 770 P.2d 24, 28 (citing Vigil v. Arzola , 699 P.2d 613 (N.M.

22
Hinson v. Camerongreen
okla · 1987 · cited in 1 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014
2 sentences

2014Comments This Instruction is based on the public policy exception to the employment at will doctrine that was recognized in Vannerson v. Board of Regents of the Univ of Oklahoma , 1989 OK 125, 784 P.2d 1053 (Okla. 1989) ; Burk v. K-Mart Corp. , 1989 OK 22, ¶¶ 17-20, 770 P.2d 24, 28-29 (Okla. 1989) ; and Hinson v. Cameron , 1987 OK 49, ¶ 10, 742 P.2d 549, 552-53 (Okla. 1987) .

2014Comments This Instruction is based on the public policy exception to the employment at will doctrine that was recognized in Vannerson v. Board of Regents of the Univ of Oklahoma , 1989 OK 125, 784 P.2d 1053 (Okla. 1989) ; Burk v. K-Mart Corp. , 1989 OK 22, ¶¶ 17-20, 770 P.2d 24, 28-29 (Okla. 1989) ; and Hinson v. Cameron , 1987 OK 49, ¶ 10, 742 P.2d 549, 552-53 (Okla. 1987) .

11
Vigil v. Arzolagreen
nm · 1984 · cited in 1 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014
2 sentences

2014See Burk v. K-Mart Corp., 1989 OK 22, ¶ 14 , 770 P.2d 24, 28 (citing Vigil v. Arzola, 102 N.M. 682 , 699 P.2d 613 (N.M.Ct.App.1983), rev'd in part on other grounds, 101 N.M. 687 , 687 P.2d 1038 (1984) (the focus of an action for wrongful discharge by an employer of an at will employee is upon the employer's duty to act in accordance with public policy)).

2014See Burk v. K-Mart Corp., 1989 OK 22, ¶ 14 , 770 P.2d 24, 28 (citing Vigil v. Arzola, 102 N.M. 682 , 699 P.2d 613 (N.M.Ct.App.1983), rev'd in part on other grounds, 101 N.M. 687 , 687 P.2d 1038 (1984) (the focus of an action for wrongful discharge by an employer of an at will employee is upon the employer's duty to act in accordance with public policy)).

11
Darrow v. Integris Health, Inc.green
okla · 2008 · cited in 1 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
2 sentences

2008"Only a specific Oklahoma court decision, state legislative or constitutional provision, or a provision in the federal constitution that prescribes a norm of conduct for the state can serve as a source of Oklahoma's public policy." Darrow, 2008 OK 1, ¶ 13 , 176 P.3d at 1212 (emphasis omitted). 118 "While a federal statute cannot by itself serve as a statement of Oklahoma policy, a federal statutory remedy may be as effective as an Oklahoma statutory remedy in dissuading employers from discharging employees for reasons that violate Oklahoma public policy." Clinton v. State ex rel.

2008"Only a specific Oklahoma court decision, state legislative or constitutional provision, or a provision in the federal constitution that prescribes a norm of conduct for the state can serve as a source of Oklahoma's public policy." Darrow, 2008 OK 1, ¶ 13 , 176 P.3d at 1212 (emphasis omitted). 118 "While a federal statute cannot by itself serve as a statement of Oklahoma policy, a federal statutory remedy may be as effective as an Oklahoma statutory remedy in dissuading employers from discharging employees for reasons that violate Oklahoma public policy." Clinton v. State ex rel.

11
Deiters v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.green
tnmd · 1993 · cited in 1 Oklahoma opinions naming this issue, 1994–1994
2 sentences

1994Plaintiff cannot stake his claim on the allegation that KLM by discharging him violated general public policies in favor of the right to counsel and the right to free access to the courts.” More recently, in Deiters v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., 842 F.Supp. 1023, 1029 (M.D.Tenn.1993), the court concluded that the Tennessee constitutional provision guaranteeing access to courts “does not create a clear and unambiguous public policy exception to the employment at will doctrine.” Other courts specifically holding an at-will-employee may not bring an action against his/her employer for wrongful disc

1994Plaintiff cannot stake his claim on the allegation that KLM by discharging him violated general public policies in favor of the right to counsel and the right to free access to the courts." More recently, in Deiters v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., 842 F. Supp. 1023, 1029 (M.D.Tenn. 1993), the court concluded that the Tennessee constitutional provision guaranteeing access to courts "does not create a clear and unambiguous public policy exception to the employment at will doctrine." Other courts specifically holding an at-will-employee may not bring an action against his/her employer for wrongful di

11

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
Tate v. Browning-Ferris, Inc. green
okla · 1992
2 sentences

2009For an Instruction where the plaintiff's claim is that the discharge was in retaliation for plaintiff's refusal to act in violation of an established and well-defined public policy, see Instruction No. 21.2, supra. For an Instruction where the plaintiff's claim is that the discharge was in retaliation for plaintiff's performing an act consistent with a clear and compelling public policy, see Instruction No. 21.3, supra. Comments In Tate v. Browning-Ferris, Inc., 1992 OK 72 , ¶ 10, 833 P.2d 1218, 1225 , the Oklahoma Supreme Court held that the public policy exception was applicable to a raciall

2009For an Instruction where the plaintiff's claim is that the discharge was in retaliation for plaintiff's refusal to act in violation of an established and well-defined public policy, see Instruction No. 21.2, supra. For an Instruction where the plaintiff's claim is that the discharge was in retaliation for plaintiff's performing an act consistent with a clear and compelling public policy, see Instruction No. 21.8, supra. Comments In Tate v. Browning-Ferris, Inc., 1992 OK 72 , ¶ 10, 833 P.2d 1218, 1225 , the Oklahoma Supreme Court held that the public policy exception was applicable to a raciall

22009–2009
Vannerson v. Bd. of Regents of Univ. of Okl. green
okla · 1989
2 sentences

2014Comments This Instruction is based on the public policy exception to the employment at will doctrine that was recognized in Vannerson v. Board of Regents of the Univ of Oklahoma , 1989 OK 125, 784 P.2d 1053 (Okla. 1989) ; Burk v. K-Mart Corp. , 1989 OK 22, ¶¶ 17-20, 770 P.2d 24, 28-29 (Okla. 1989) ; and Hinson v. Cameron , 1987 OK 49, ¶ 10, 742 P.2d 549, 552-53 (Okla. 1987) .

2014Comments This Instruction is based on the public policy exception to the employment at will doctrine that was recognized in Vannerson v. Board of Regents of the Univ of Oklahoma , 1989 OK 125, 784 P.2d 1053 (Okla. 1989) ; Burk v. K-Mart Corp. , 1989 OK 22, ¶¶ 17-20, 770 P.2d 24, 28-29 (Okla. 1989) ; and Hinson v. Cameron , 1987 OK 49, ¶ 10, 742 P.2d 549, 552-53 (Okla. 1987) .

12014–2014
Clinton v. State Ex Rel. Logan County Election Board green
okla · 2001
2 sentences

2004This Court granted certiorari review. ¶ 4 The Burk public policy exception to the employment at will doctrine "rests on the notion that in a civilized society the [right] of employers to discharge at-will employees is necessarily balanced against the rights of the public at large as found in existing law." Clinton v. Logan Co. Election Bd., 2001 OK 52 , 29 P.3d 543, 545 .

2004This Court granted certiorari review. ¶ 4 The Burk public policy exception to the employment at will doctrine "rests on the notion that in a civilized society the [right] of employers to discharge at-will employees is necessarily balanced against the rights of the public at large as found in existing law." Clinton v. Logan Co. Election Bd., 2001 OK 52 , 29 P.3d 543, 545 .

12004–2004
Whitman v. Schlumberger Ltd. green
cand · 1992
2 sentences

1994Plaintiff cannot stake his claim on the allegation that KLM by discharging him violated general public policies in favor of the right to counsel and the right to free access to the courts.” More recently, in Deiters v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., 842 F.Supp. 1023, 1029 (M.D.Tenn.1993), the court concluded that the Tennessee constitutional provision guaranteeing access to courts “does not create a clear and unambiguous public policy exception to the employment at will doctrine.” Other courts specifically holding an at-will-employee may not bring an action against his/her employer for wrongful disc

1994Plaintiff cannot stake his claim on the allegation that KLM by discharging him violated general public policies in favor of the right to counsel and the right to free access to the courts." More recently, in Deiters v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., 842 F. Supp. 1023, 1029 (M.D.Tenn. 1993), the court concluded that the Tennessee constitutional provision guaranteeing access to courts "does not create a clear and unambiguous public policy exception to the employment at will doctrine." Other courts specifically holding an at-will-employee may not bring an action against his/her employer for wrongful di

11994–1994
Bernard Beam v. Ipco Corporation, D/B/A Sterling Optical green
ca7 · 1988
2 sentences

1994Plaintiff cannot stake his claim on the allegation that KLM by discharging him violated general public policies in favor of the right to counsel and the right to free access to the courts.” More recently, in Deiters v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., 842 F.Supp. 1023, 1029 (M.D.Tenn.1993), the court concluded that the Tennessee constitutional provision guaranteeing access to courts “does not create a clear and unambiguous public policy exception to the employment at will doctrine.” Other courts specifically holding an at-will-employee may not bring an action against his/her employer for wrongful disc

1994Plaintiff cannot stake his claim on the allegation that KLM by discharging him violated general public policies in favor of the right to counsel and the right to free access to the courts." More recently, in Deiters v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., 842 F. Supp. 1023, 1029 (M.D.Tenn. 1993), the court concluded that the Tennessee constitutional provision guaranteeing access to courts "does not create a clear and unambiguous public policy exception to the employment at will doctrine." Other courts specifically holding an at-will-employee may not bring an action against his/her employer for wrongful di

11994–1994
Roxana Petroleum Corp. v. State Industrial Commission neutral
okla · 1928
2 sentences

1944Petitioner asserts that there is no competent evidence in the record to sustain the finding of the State Industrial Commission that the accident arose out of and in the course of the employment. *168 The respondent seeks to sustain the award upon two grounds: First, that he had reached the premises upon which the work was being done, and is within the rule announced by this court in Roxana Petroleum Co. v. State Industrial Commission, 134 Okla. 181 , 272 P. 847 ; and, second, that he was going to a place at the direction of the petitioner, and that the injury arose out of and in the course of

1944Petitioner asserts that there is no competent evidence in the record to sustain the finding of the State Industrial Commission that the accident arose out of and in the course of the employment. *168 The respondent seeks to sustain the award upon two grounds: First, that he had reached the premises upon which the work was being done, and is within the rule announced by this court in Roxana Petroleum Co. v. State Industrial Commission, 134 Okla. 181 , 272 P. 847 ; and, second, that he was going to a place at the direction of the petitioner, and that the injury arose out of and in the course of

11944–1944
Coon v. Morton neutral
okla · 1941
2 sentences

1944Petitioner asserts that there is no competent evidence in the record to sustain the finding of the State Industrial Commission that the accident arose out of and in the course of the employment. *168 The respondent seeks to sustain the award upon two grounds: First, that he had reached the premises upon which the work was being done, and is within the rule announced by this court in Roxana Petroleum Co. v. State Industrial Commission, 134 Okla. 181 , 272 P. 847 ; and, second, that he was going to a place at the direction of the petitioner, and that the injury arose out of and in the course of

1944Petitioner asserts that there is no competent evidence in the record to sustain the finding of the State Industrial Commission that the accident arose out of and in the course of the employment. *168 The respondent seeks to sustain the award upon two grounds: First, that he had reached the premises upon which the work was being done, and is within the rule announced by this court in Roxana Petroleum Co. v. State Industrial Commission, 134 Okla. 181 , 272 P. 847 ; and, second, that he was going to a place at the direction of the petitioner, and that the injury arose out of and in the course of

11944–1944

Statutes the citing opinions construe

OK § Okla. Stat. tit. 25, § 1101 (3) OK § Okla. Stat. tit. 25, § 1350 (3) USC § 29u.s.c.626 (3)

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

IN 61 (1913–2025) TX 53 (1967–2024) OH 50 (1932–2026) MS 32 (1992–2024) CA 29 (1919–2026) VA 25 (1928–2019) TN 21 (1916–2020) NY 20 (1950–2025) WA 20 (1967–2024) CT 18 (1984–2004) NC 16 (1988–2014) MO 16 (1909–2016) IA 13 (1983–2024) LA 11 (1969–2023) MD 10 (1940–2017) OK 10 (1944–2014) PA 10 (1940–2022) WI 10 (1986–2017) IL 9 (1980–2024) MA 8 (1960–2010) MN 8 (1902–2003) FL 8 (1969–2026) MI 7 (1971–2009) NM 7 (1934–2026) NJ 6 (1938–2017) AR 6 (1946–2005) SC 6 (1991–2025) AL 6 (1982–2004) ID 5 (1984–2012) CO 4 (1986–2019) WY 4 (1994–2012) OR 4 (1925–2021) UT 4 (1944–2016) SD 3 (1989–2001) KY 3 (1907–2011) DC 3 (1977–1997) NV 2 (2017–2017) GA 2 (1947–1985) NE 2 (1997–2003) VT 2 (1957–2025) ME 2 (2014–2023) KS 2 (2000–2002)

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