Okla. Stat. » Title 12 — CIVIL PROCEDURE
Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 1455 (2026)

Motion upon affidavit - Notice

✓ laws through the 2025 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section OK-LEGoklegislature.gov JustiaOkla. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The motion for the writ must be made upon affidavit, and the court may require a notice of the application to be given to the adverse party, or may grant an order to show cause why it should not be allowed, or may grant the writ without notice. R.L. 1910, § 4911.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1972–2023 · leading case: Dale v. City of Yukon, 618 P.2d 954 (Okla. Civ. App. 1980).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Dale v. City of Yukon, 618 P.2d 954 (Okla. Civ. App. 1980). · cites it 2× “Title 12 O.S.1971, § 1455. The movant must allege: (1) a clear legal right on his own part to have the things done which are asked for, (2) the clear and indisputable legal duty of respondent to do the things he is called upon to do, and that it is a nondiscretionary act; or he…”
Ray v. Stitt, 2023 OK CIV APP 9. · cites it 2× “2d 954 12 O.S. § 1455 Dale at ¶ 12. Upon the presentation of such a motion, the court has three options.”
Baker v. Kaiser, 793 P.2d 877 (Okla. Civ. App. 1990). “1981 § 1332 as an Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus, 1 it satisfies the requirements of 12 O.S.1981 § 1455 that motion for mandamus be made upon affidavit.”
Glanz v. McCray, 881 P.2d 766 (Okla. Civ. App. 1994). “12 O.S. § 1455. In the present case, DHS obtained personal service on Appellants of DHS’s applications for temporary injunction, temporary restraining order, and writ of mandamus.”
Ray v. Stitt, 2023 OK CIV APP 9. · cites it 2× “2d 954 12 O.S. § 1455 Dale at ¶ 12. Upon the presentation of such a motion, the court has three options.”
Ray v. Stitt, 2023 OK CIV APP 9. · cites it 2× “12 O.S. § 1455; Dale at ¶ 12. Upon the presentation of such a motion, the court has three options.”
Hawkins v. Potter, 503 P.2d 192 (Okla. 1972). · cites it 2× “If we are to treat the instrument filed by Petitioner/Appellant as a Petition for Writ of Mandamus, a cursory examination thereof indicates he has complied neither with the statutes governing petitions for writ of mandamus nor the written Rules of this Court.”
Ray v. Stitt, 527 P.3d 994 (Okla. Civ. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “2d 954 12 O.S. § 1455 Dale at ¶ 12. Upon the presentation of such a motion, the court has three options.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.