Oklahoma Statutes
Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 936 (2026)
Attorney fees taxed as costs in actions for labor or
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
OK-LEGoklegislature.gov
JustiaOkla. Stat.
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
services rendered or on certain accounts, bills and contracts. A. In any civil action to recover for labor or services rendered, or on an open account, a statement of account, account stated, note, bill, negotiable instrument, or contract relating to the purchase or sale of goods, wares, or merchandise, unless otherwise provided by law or the contract which is the subject of the action, the prevailing party shall be allowed a reasonable attorney fee to be set by the court, to be taxed and collected as costs. B. In any civil action to recover unpaid fees, fines, costs, expenses or any other debt owed to this state or its agencies, as defined pursuant to Section 152 of Title 51 of the Oklahoma Statutes, unless otherwise provided by law, the prevailing party
shall be allowed a reasonable attorney fee to be set by the court, to be taxed and collected as costs. Added by Laws 1961, p. 64, § 1, emerg. eff. April 13, 1961. Amended by Laws 1967, c. 135, § 1, emerg. eff. April 27, 1967; Laws 1970, c. 282, § 1; Laws 2002, c. 468, § 5, eff. Nov. 1, 2002; Laws 2011, c. 187, § 4, eff. Nov. 1, 2011.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 213
cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1963–2025 · leading case: Comanche Nation of Oklahoma v. Coffey, 2020 OK 90 (Okla. 2020).
Comanche Nation of Oklahoma v. Coffey, 2020 OK 90 (Okla. 2020). “Thereafter, Coffey filed an application for prevailing party attorney fees pursuant to 12 O.S.2011 § 936. The trial court denied Coffey's request for attorney fees, finding he was not the prevailing party because he had not prevailed on the merits of the action.”
Tomahawk Resources, Inc. v. Craven, 2005 OK 82 (Okla. 2005). “§ 176 and 12 O.S. § 936. [1] ¶ 6 In the case at bar, both plaintiff and defendants were prevailing parties on their claims: Tomahawk for foreclosure of its *224 mechanic's lien and the Cravens on their breach of contract counterclaim.”
Hamilton v. Telex Corp., 625 P.2d 106 (Okla. 1981). “Hamilton, the prevailing party pursuant to 12 O.S.1971 § 936 and previous order of this court.”
Kay v. Venezuelan Sun Oil Co., 806 P.2d 648 (Okla. 1991). “*649 ALMA WILSON, Justice: The issue presented is whether the action below is one to recover for labor or services as contemplated by 12 O.S.1981, § 936. We hold that § 936 does not authorize attorney fees in the action below and that the "labor and services" provisions of § 936…”
Hough v. Hough, 2004 OK 45 (Okla. 2004). “The provisions of 12 O.S.2001 § 936 [1] authorize an allowance of attorney's fee in an action to recover "for services.”
Arkoma Gas Co. v. Otis Eng'g Corp., 849 P.2d 392 (Okla. 1993). “The issue is whether the trial court, in determining a reasonable attorney’s fee under 12 O.S.1981 § 936, erred in considering the size of plaintiff’s recovery *393 and reducing the claimed attorney fee accordingly.”
Holbert v. Echeverria, 744 P.2d 960 (Okla. 1987). “Seller may be allowed a counsel fee only if his plea for the award fall under the categories enumerated in 12 O.S.1981 § 936. 24 Three alternatives could make § 936 applicable to the cause of action Purchasers advanced in this case: (1) the contract in suit provides for recovery…”
Oklahoma Nat. Gas Co. v. Apache Corp., 355 F. Supp. 2d 1246 (N.D. Okla. 2004). “Pursuant to 12 O.S. § 936, ONG has moved for an award of attorney fees as prevailing party [Dkt.”
Prof'l Credit Collections, Inc. v. Smith, 933 P.2d 307 (Okla. 1997). “Smith sought appellate review, arguing that she was the "prevailing party" under the provisions of 12 O.S.1991 § 936. [1] The Court of Civil Appeals rejected *310 the argument and affirmed the nisi prius order.”
LPCX CORP. v. Faulkner, 818 P.2d 431 (Okla. 1991). “The defendants also base an allegation of error on the proposition that the trial court erred in awarding attorneys fees to Withrow and LPCX under 12 O.S. § 936. The defendants state that Withrow's third cause of action sought recovery of money paid to fix the casing leak.”
Sw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Parker Pest Control, Inc., 737 P.2d 1186 (Okla. 1987). “1981 § 936, which is as follows: “In any civil action to recover on an open account, a statement of account, account stated, note, bill, negotiable instrument, or contract relating to the purchase or sale of goods, wares, or merchandise, or for labor or services, unless…”
Ferrell Constr. Co. v. Russell Creek Coal Co., 645 P.2d 1005 (Okla. 1982). “Ferrell, in its cross-appeal, complains because the court below refused to award it an attorney fee under the provisions of 12 O.S.1971, § 936 15 as the prevailing party.”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 936(2) — 1 case
Holbert v. Echeverria, 744 P.2d 960 (Okla. 1987). “Seller may be allowed a counsel fee only if his plea for the award fall under the categories enumerated in 12 O.S.1981 § 936. 24 Three alternatives could make § 936 applicable to the cause of action Purchasers advanced in this case: (1) the contract in suit provides for recovery…”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 936(A) — 5 cases
Tulsa Adjustment Bureau, Inc. v. Calnan, 2018 OK 60 (Okla. 2018).
Comanche Nation of Oklahoma v. Coffey, 2020 OK 90 (Okla. 2020). “Thereafter, Coffey filed an application for prevailing party attorney fees pursuant to 12 O.S.2011 § 936. The trial court denied Coffey's request for attorney fees, finding he was not the prevailing party because he had not prevailed on the merits of the action.”
Bryan's Car Corner, Inc. v. Mangum, 390 P.3d 982 (Okla. Civ. App. 2016).
Matthews, Jr. v. Gamboa (Bankr. W.D. Okla. 2020).
Bank of Kremlin v. Davis, 270 P.3d 220 (Okla. Civ. App. 2011).
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.