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

Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 2202 (2026)

Judicial notice of adjudicative facts

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

A. This section governs only judicial notice of adjudicative facts. B. A judicially noticed adjudicative fact shall not be subject to reasonable dispute in that it is either: 1. Generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court; or 2. Capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned. C. A court may take judicial notice, whether requested or not. D. A court shall take judicial notice if requested by a party and supplied with the necessary information. E. In a civil action or proceeding, the court shall instruct the jury to accept as conclusive any fact judicially noticed. In a criminal case, the court shall instruct the jury that it may, but is not required to, accept as conclusive any fact judicially noticed. Added by Laws 1978, c. 285, § 202, eff. Oct. 1, 1978. Amended by Laws 2002, c. 468, § 27, eff. Nov. 1, 2002.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 31 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1980–2025 · leading case: Indep. Sch. Dist. 52 v. Hofmeister, 2020 OK 56, 473 P.3d 475.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Indep. Sch. Dist. 52 v. Hofmeister, 2020 OK 56, 473 P.3d 475. · cites it 3× “22 12 O.S. 2011 § 2202: A. This section governs only judicial notice of adjudicative facts.”
Prescott v. Oklahoma Capitol Pres. Comm'n, 2015 OK 54, 373 P.3d 1032. · cites it 2× “Additionally, 12 O.S. § 2202 provides that a court may take judicial notice of facts "whether requested or not" and when the facts are "capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot be reasonably questioned.”
State v. Torres, 2004 OK 12, 87 P.3d 572. “For the proper procedure in preparing an appellate record to include recorded material incorporated by reference in a pleading, see id.”
Berkson v. State ex rel. Askins as Admin. Dir. of the Courts, 2023 OK 70, 532 P.3d 36. “'" 12 O.S.2021 §2202 ¶36 Newberry and Berkson dispute what is known concerning Berkson's standing.”
Turpen v. Oklahoma Corp. Comm'n, 769 P.2d 1309 (Okla. 1989). “Spievack, president and executive director of the North American Telecommunications Association, Public Utilities Fortnightly 13 (May 15, 1986). He wrote: “The data — derived from documents at the FCC and Securities and Exchange Commission (see the accompanying figure) — show…”
Perry v. Meek, 618 P.2d 934 (Okla. 1980). “Oklahoma’s Evidence Code, 12 O.S.Supp.1979 § 2202 provides statutory guidelines for judicial notice of adjudicative facts.”
Callison v. Callison, 687 P.2d 106 (Okla. 1984). “1981 § 2203(A)(1), note 26, supra; and 12 O.S.1981 § 2202(B)(2) which provides: A judicially noticed adjudicative fact shall not be subject to reasonable dispute.”
Cotner v. Golden, 2006 OK 25, 136 P.3d 630. “12 O.S. § 2202(B)(2). See 1 Leo H. Whinery, Oklahoma Evidence, Commentary on the Law of Evidence, 107, § 6.”
Union Texas Petroleum Corp. v. Jackson, 909 P.2d 131 (Okla. Civ. App. 1995). “Mobil included a copy of the Plan of Unitization of the CIU in its brief to this Court and contends we should take judicial notice of the Plan under 12 O.S.1991, §§ 2202, 2203 because it is a public record filed with the Corporation Commission.”
Fields v. A & B Elec., 788 P.2d 940 (Okla. 1990). “Because the twentieth day after mailing of the appealed order was Sunday, December 13, 1987, the final day for commencement of this appeal would have been Monday, December 14, 1987. The closing of the Clerk’s office before 4:00 p.”
Tucker v. New Dominion, L.L.C., 2010 OK 14, 230 P.3d 882. “” 12 O.S.2001, § 2202(B); Bd. of Education of Independent Sch.”
Browning v. State ex rel. Dep't of Pub. Saf., 812 P.2d 1372 (Okla. Civ. App. 1991). “” (Emphasis added). Similarly, adjudicative facts which are not subject to reasonable dispute may be judicially noticed if the court is “requested by a party and supplied with the necessary information.”
Show all 31 citing cases →
Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 2202(B): 1 case
Tucker v. New Dominion, L.L.C., 2010 OK 14, 230 P.3d 882. “” 12 O.S.2001, § 2202(B); Bd. of Education of Independent Sch.”
Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 2202(B)(2): 3 cases
Callison v. Callison, 687 P.2d 106 (Okla. 1984). “1981 § 2203(A)(1), note 26, supra; and 12 O.S.1981 § 2202(B)(2) which provides: A judicially noticed adjudicative fact shall not be subject to reasonable dispute.”
Cotner v. Golden, 2006 OK 25, 136 P.3d 630. “12 O.S. § 2202(B)(2). See 1 Leo H. Whinery, Oklahoma Evidence, Commentary on the Law of Evidence, 107, § 6.”
Walkey v. Triad Drilling Co., 911 P.2d 1222 (Okla. Civ. App. 1995).
Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 2202(C): 2 cases
Practical Prods. Corp. v. Brightmire, 864 P.2d 330 (Okla. 1992).
Doe v. First Presbyterian Church U.S.A. of Tulsa, 2017 OK 15.
Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 2202(D): 2 cases
Browning v. State ex rel. Dep't of Pub. Saf., 812 P.2d 1372 (Okla. Civ. App. 1991). “” (Emphasis added). Similarly, adjudicative facts which are not subject to reasonable dispute may be judicially noticed if the court is “requested by a party and supplied with the necessary information.”
Cooper v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 921 P.2d 376 (Okla. Civ. App. 1996).
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.