loss claim in Oklahoma

1936In the case of Vaughn & Rush v. Stump, 156 Okla. 125 , 9 P. (2d) 764 , an award was sustained where'an employee suffered a partial loss of hearing in one ear caused by the noise of an exhaust near the place the employee was working.

1936In the case of Vaughn & Rush v. Stump, 156 Okla. 125 , 9 P. (2d) 764 , an award was sustained where'an employee suffered a partial loss of hearing in one ear caused by the noise of an exhaust near the place the employee was working.

1936The ease of United States Gypsum Co. v. McMichael, 146 Okla. 74 , 293 P. 773 , Which is relied upon bv petitioner herein, was therein distinguished.

1936The ease of United States Gypsum Co. v. McMichael, 146 Okla. 74 , 293 P. 773 , Which is relied upon bv petitioner herein, was therein distinguished.

2018Wilson v. Gipson , 1988 OK 35 , 753 P.2d 1349 , 1354 citing Neal v. Donahue , 1980 OK 82 , 611 P.2d 1125 , 1129. 51 O.S.2011 § 155 (25) (and as amended) states: "The state or a political subdivision shall not be liable if a loss or claim results from: ... 25.

2018Wilson v. Gipson , 1988 OK 35 , 753 P.2d 1349 , 1354 citing Neal v. Donahue , 1980 OK 82 , 611 P.2d 1125 , 1129. 51 O.S.2011 § 155 (25) (and as amended) states: "The state or a political subdivision shall not be liable if a loss or claim results from: ... 25.

2018Wilson v. Gipson , 1988 OK 35 , 753 P.2d 1349 , 1354 citing Neal v. Donahue , 1980 OK 82 , 611 P.2d 1125 , 1129. 51 O.S.2011 § 155 (25) (and as amended) states: "The state or a political subdivision shall not be liable if a loss or claim results from: ... 25.

2018Wilson v. Gipson , 1988 OK 35 , 753 P.2d 1349 , 1354 citing Neal v. Donahue , 1980 OK 82 , 611 P.2d 1125 , 1129. 51 O.S.2011 § 155 (25) (and as amended) states: "The state or a political subdivision shall not be liable if a loss or claim results from: ... 25.

1999Although the material facts are undisputed, the question presented is whether these facts might give rise to liability. ¶ 11 The Governmental Tort Claims Act, 51 O.S.1991 § 151 et seq. is the legislative abrogation of sovereign immunity. 6 The Act provides the manner and extent sovereign immunity is waived. 7 Although liability is the rule and immunity from liability is the exception, 8 § 155 of the Act enumerates thirty-one specific exemptions from liability. 9 One exception to liability is 51 O.S.1991 § 155(6) of the Act which provides in pertinent part: “The state or a political subdivision

1999Although the material facts are undisputed, the question presented is whether these facts might give rise to liability. ¶ 11 The Governmental Tort Claims Act, 51 O.S.1991 § 151 et seq. is the legislative abrogation of sovereign immunity. 6 The Act provides the manner and extent sovereign immunity is waived. 7 Although liability is the rule and immunity from liability is the exception, 8 § 155 of the Act enumerates thirty-one specific exemptions from liability. 9 One exception to liability is 51 O.S.1991 § 155(6) of the Act which provides in pertinent part: “The state or a political subdivision

1933This court has had before it four eases involving awards for disfigurement resulting from injuries to teeth—Bell Oil & Gas Co. v. Industrial Commission, 88 Okla. 98 , 211 P. 1042 ; Century Indemnity Co. v. Trammell, 148 Okla. 194 , 298 P. 246 ; Mabee v. Herring, 150 Okla. 165 , 1 P. (2d) 149 ; and Mabee v. Anthony, 155 Okla. 35 , 8 P. (2d) 22 .

1933This court has had before it four eases involving awards for disfigurement resulting from injuries to teeth—Bell Oil & Gas Co. v. Industrial Commission, 88 Okla. 98 , 211 P. 1042 ; Century Indemnity Co. v. Trammell, 148 Okla. 194 , 298 P. 246 ; Mabee v. Herring, 150 Okla. 165 , 1 P. (2d) 149 ; and Mabee v. Anthony, 155 Okla. 35 , 8 P. (2d) 22 .

2018Plaintiff claims Defendant is not immune from liability because maintenance of the streetlight is an operational or ministerial function. ¶13 "Whether an act is discretionary or ministerial for purposes of application of the [GTCA] is a legal issue." Walker v. City of Moore , 1992 OK 73, ¶ 13 , 837 P.2d 876, 879 . "[D]iscretionary immunity must be narrowly construed." Robinson v. City of Bartlesville Bd. of Educ. , 1985 OK 39, ¶ 11 , 700 P.2d 1013, 1016 . ¶14 Section 155(5) provides that a governmental entity will not be liable for a loss or claim resulting from "[p]erformance of or the failur

2018Plaintiff claims Defendant is not immune from liability because maintenance of the streetlight is an operational or ministerial function. ¶13 "Whether an act is discretionary or ministerial for purposes of application of the [GTCA] is a legal issue." Walker v. City of Moore , 1992 OK 73, ¶ 13 , 837 P.2d 876, 879 . "[D]iscretionary immunity must be narrowly construed." Robinson v. City of Bartlesville Bd. of Educ. , 1985 OK 39, ¶ 11 , 700 P.2d 1013, 1016 . ¶14 Section 155(5) provides that a governmental entity will not be liable for a loss or claim resulting from "[p]erformance of or the failur

2018Plaintiff claims Defendant is not immune from liability because maintenance of the streetlight is an operational or ministerial function. ¶13 "Whether an act is discretionary or ministerial for purposes of application of the [GTCA] is a legal issue." Walker v. City of Moore , 1992 OK 73, ¶ 13 , 837 P.2d 876, 879 . "[D]iscretionary immunity must be narrowly construed." Robinson v. City of Bartlesville Bd. of Educ. , 1985 OK 39, ¶ 11 , 700 P.2d 1013, 1016 . ¶14 Section 155(5) provides that a governmental entity will not be liable for a loss or claim resulting from "[p]erformance of or the failur

2018Plaintiff claims Defendant is not immune from liability because maintenance of the streetlight is an operational or ministerial function. ¶13 "Whether an act is discretionary or ministerial for purposes of application of the [GTCA] is a legal issue." Walker v. City of Moore , 1992 OK 73, ¶ 13 , 837 P.2d 876, 879 . "[D]iscretionary immunity must be narrowly construed." Robinson v. City of Bartlesville Bd. of Educ. , 1985 OK 39, ¶ 11 , 700 P.2d 1013, 1016 . ¶14 Section 155(5) provides that a governmental entity will not be liable for a loss or claim resulting from "[p]erformance of or the failur

2018Plaintiff claims Defendant is not immune from liability because maintenance of the streetlight is an operational or ministerial function. ¶13 "Whether an act is discretionary or ministerial for purposes of application of the [GTCA] is a legal issue." Walker v. City of Moore , 1992 OK 73, ¶ 13 , 837 P.2d 876, 879 . "[D]iscretionary immunity must be narrowly construed." Robinson v. City of Bartlesville Bd. of Educ. , 1985 OK 39, ¶ 11 , 700 P.2d 1013, 1016 . ¶14 Section 155(5) provides that a governmental entity will not be liable for a loss or claim resulting from "[p]erformance of or the failur

2018Plaintiff claims Defendant is not immune from liability because maintenance of the streetlight is an operational or ministerial function. ¶13 "Whether an act is discretionary or ministerial for purposes of application of the [GTCA] is a legal issue." Walker v. City of Moore , 1992 OK 73, ¶ 13 , 837 P.2d 876, 879 . "[D]iscretionary immunity must be narrowly construed." Robinson v. City of Bartlesville Bd. of Educ. , 1985 OK 39, ¶ 11 , 700 P.2d 1013, 1016 . ¶14 Section 155(5) provides that a governmental entity will not be liable for a loss or claim resulting from "[p]erformance of or the failur

2016Any claim based upon an act or omission of an employee in the placement of ehildren[.] 3 ¶ 17 Indeed, this Court recently acknowledged in GJA, 2015 OK CIV APP 32 , 347 P.3d 310 , that 155(29) pertains to acts or omissions of DHS employees in the placement of children.

2016Any claim based upon an act or omission of an employee in the placement of ehildren[.] 3 ¶ 17 Indeed, this Court recently acknowledged in GJA, 2015 OK CIV APP 32 , 347 P.3d 310 , that 155(29) pertains to acts or omissions of DHS employees in the placement of children.

2008Defendants argue that court clerks are entitled to quasi-judicial immunity for performing tasks intimately related to the judicial process, citing Sindram v. Suda, 986 F.2d 1459 (D.C.Cir.1998) for the proposition that all acts of auxiliary court personnel that are basic and integral parts of the judicial function unless those acts are done in the clear absence of all jurisdiction.

2007Supp. 2006 § 155. 3 T12 The Oklahoma Supreme Court has stated, "The maintenance and repair of its sewers is a corporate or proprietary function of a city, and the city is liable for injuries sustained because of its failure to maintain and repair sewers properly." City of Holdenville v. Moore, 1956 OK 34, ¶ 8 , 293 P.2d 363, 366 (quoting City of Altus v. Martin, 1954 OK 9, ¶ 0 , 268 P.2d 228, 2290 ); see also Davis v. Town of Cashion, 1977 OK 59, ¶ 7 , 562 P.2d 854, 856 ; Oklahoma City v. Romano, 1967 OK 191, ¶ 6 , 433 P.2d 924, 926 .

2007Supp. 2006 § 155. 3 T12 The Oklahoma Supreme Court has stated, "The maintenance and repair of its sewers is a corporate or proprietary function of a city, and the city is liable for injuries sustained because of its failure to maintain and repair sewers properly." City of Holdenville v. Moore, 1956 OK 34, ¶ 8 , 293 P.2d 363, 366 (quoting City of Altus v. Martin, 1954 OK 9, ¶ 0 , 268 P.2d 228, 2290 ); see also Davis v. Town of Cashion, 1977 OK 59, ¶ 7 , 562 P.2d 854, 856 ; Oklahoma City v. Romano, 1967 OK 191, ¶ 6 , 433 P.2d 924, 926 .

2007Supp. 2006 § 155. 3 T12 The Oklahoma Supreme Court has stated, "The maintenance and repair of its sewers is a corporate or proprietary function of a city, and the city is liable for injuries sustained because of its failure to maintain and repair sewers properly." City of Holdenville v. Moore, 1956 OK 34, ¶ 8 , 293 P.2d 363, 366 (quoting City of Altus v. Martin, 1954 OK 9, ¶ 0 , 268 P.2d 228, 2290 ); see also Davis v. Town of Cashion, 1977 OK 59, ¶ 7 , 562 P.2d 854, 856 ; Oklahoma City v. Romano, 1967 OK 191, ¶ 6 , 433 P.2d 924, 926 .

2007Supp. 2006 § 155. 3 T12 The Oklahoma Supreme Court has stated, "The maintenance and repair of its sewers is a corporate or proprietary function of a city, and the city is liable for injuries sustained because of its failure to maintain and repair sewers properly." City of Holdenville v. Moore, 1956 OK 34, ¶ 8 , 293 P.2d 363, 366 (quoting City of Altus v. Martin, 1954 OK 9, ¶ 0 , 268 P.2d 228, 2290 ); see also Davis v. Town of Cashion, 1977 OK 59, ¶ 7 , 562 P.2d 854, 856 ; Oklahoma City v. Romano, 1967 OK 191, ¶ 6 , 433 P.2d 924, 926 .

2006As the Supreme Court stated in State Board, there is "no justifiable reason why [Wagoner County] should secure to itself the benefits of a contract without assuming the corresponding liabilities." See State Board, 1975 OK 144 at 1 11, 542 P.2d at 505 . 25 The trial court did not err in holding that Wagoner County is not immune from KTUL's contractual claim of indemnity.

2006As the Supreme Court stated in State Board, there is "no justifiable reason why [Wagoner County] should secure to itself the benefits of a contract without assuming the corresponding liabilities." See State Board, 1975 OK 144 at 1 11, 542 P.2d at 505 . 25 The trial court did not err in holding that Wagoner County is not immune from KTUL's contractual claim of indemnity.

2004Inspection powers or functions, including failure to malte an inspection, review or approval, or making an inadequate or negligent inspection, review or approval of any property, real or personal, to determine whether the property complies with or violates any law or contains a hazard to health or safety, or fails to conform to a recognized standard; * * * ” .Reynolds v. Union Public Schools, 1998 OK CIV APP 101 , 976 P.2d 557 .

2004Inspection powers or functions, including failure to malte an inspection, review or approval, or making an inadequate or negligent inspection, review or approval of any property, real or personal, to determine whether the property complies with or violates any law or contains a hazard to health or safety, or fails to conform to a recognized standard; * * * ” .Reynolds v. Union Public Schools, 1998 OK CIV APP 101 , 976 P.2d 557 .

1998The pertinent statute, 51 O.S.1991 § 155(13), states: The state or a political subdivision shall not be liable if a loss or claim results from inspection powers or functions, including failure to make an inspection, review or approval, or making an inadequate or negligent inspection, review or approval of any property, real or personal, to determine whether the property complies with or violates any law or contains a hazard to health or safety, or fails to conform to a recognized standard. ¶ 4 First we address Cooper v. Board of County Commissioners of Grady County, 1996 OK CIV APP 85 , 921 P.

1998The pertinent statute, 51 O.S.1991 § 155(13), states: The state or a political subdivision shall not be liable if a loss or claim results from inspection powers or functions, including failure to make an inspection, review or approval, or making an inadequate or negligent inspection, review or approval of any property, real or personal, to determine whether the property complies with or violates any law or contains a hazard to health or safety, or fails to conform to a recognized standard. ¶ 4 First we address Cooper v. Board of County Commissioners of Grady County, 1996 OK CIV APP 85 , 921 P.

1998Tansy v. Dacomed Corp., 1994 OK 146 , 890 P.2d 881 (Okla.1994); Matter of T.R.W., 1985 OK 99 , 722 P.2d 1197 (Okla.1985).

1998Tansy v. Dacomed Corp., 1994 OK 146 , 890 P.2d 881 (Okla.1994); Matter of T.R.W., 1985 OK 99 , 722 P.2d 1197 (Okla.1985).

1998Tansy v. Dacomed Corp., 1994 OK 146 , 890 P.2d 881 (Okla.1994); Matter of T.R.W., 1985 OK 99 , 722 P.2d 1197 (Okla.1985).

1998Tansy v. Dacomed Corp., 1994 OK 146 , 890 P.2d 881 (Okla.1994); Matter of T.R.W., 1985 OK 99 , 722 P.2d 1197 (Okla.1985).

1997Landlord concludes that if the police improperly executed the warrant, then they cannot claim the exemptions under § 155 of the GTCA, relying on Roberts v. City of Stillwater-, 646 P.2d 6 (Okl.Civ.App.1982).

1997However, the agreement for clearing of the drainage ditch was executed by the County and the landowners [see note 4, supra]; and it is undisputed that County employees and equipment were involved in the attempted clearing of the drainage ditch on Hudson's property [see note 6, supra, testimony of County Commissioner Roger Ballenger], 21 .

1997However, the agreement for clearing of the drainage ditch was executed by the County and the landowners [see note 4, supra]; and it is undisputed that County employees and equipment were involved in the attempted clearing of the drainage ditch on Hudson's property [see note 6, supra, testimony of County Commissioner Roger Ballenger], 21 .