Oklahoma Statutes
Okla. Stat. tit. 15, § 160 (2026)
Words to be taken in ordinary sense - Exceptions
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
OK-LEGoklegislature.gov
JustiaOkla. Stat.
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
The words of a contract are to be understood in their ordinary and popular sense, rather than according to their strict legal meaning, unless used by the parties in a technical sense, or unless
a special meaning is given to them by usage, in which case the latter must be followed. R.L.1910, § 954.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 40
cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1960–2026 · leading case: Lucas v. Bishop, 1998 OK 16 (Okla. 1998).
Lucas v. Bishop, 1998 OK 16 (Okla. 1998). “¶ 10 Contract interpretation is governed by statute in Oklahoma: The words of a contract are to be understood in their ordinary and popular sense rather than according to their strict legal meaning, unless used by the parties in a technical sense, or unless a special meaning is…”
Frank v. Allstate Ins. Co., 727 P.2d 577 (Okla. 1986). “1981 § 1 [7] and 15 O.S.1981 § 160 [8] provides that words used in any statute are to be understood in their ordinary sense.”
Pitco Prod. Co. v. Chaparral Energy, Inc., 2003 OK 5 (Okla. 2003). “The text of 15 O.S.1991 § 160 provides: The words of a contract are to be understood in their ordinary and popular sense, rather than according to their strict legal meaning, unless used by the parties in a technical sense, or unless a special meaning is given to them by usage,…”
Mercury Inv. Co. v. F.W. Woolworth Co., 706 P.2d 523 (Okla. 1985). “15 O.S.1981 § 160. 10 . 15 O.S.1981 § 152.”
Lewis v. Sac & Fox Tribe of Oklahoma Hous. Auth., 896 P.2d 503 (Okla. 1994). “15 O.S.1991 § 160; Mercury, supra note 72 at 529.”
Osprey L.L.C v. Kelly-Moore Paint Co., 1999 OK 50 (Okla. 1999). “Title 15 O.S.1991 § 160; Lucas v. Bishop, 1998 OK 16, ¶ 11 , 956 P.”
Gamble, Simmons & Co. v. Kerr-Mcgee Corp., 175 F.3d 762 (10th Cir. 1999). “” Okla. Stat. tit. 15, § 160 . In the present case, the parties’ intent is apparent, regardless of whether the terms are read in their ordinary, legal, or technical sense.”
WLM Retail Trust v. Tramlaw Remainderman Ltd. P'ship, 2018 IL App (1st) 170819 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). “¶ 20 Here, the language of the Agreement plainly grants WLM an option to purchase the property if the "Wal-Mart Lease shall expire or terminate for any reason, whether by default or otherwise, and whether or not prior to the expiration of the stated term thereof.”
Otis Elevator Co. v. Midland Red Oak Realty, Inc., 483 F.3d 1095 (10th Cir. 2007). “at 546 ; see Okla. Stat. tit. 15, § 160 . If a contract is ambiguous, extrinsic evidence is admissible to resolve the ambiguity.”
Kerr-McGee Corp. v. Admiral Ins. Co., 905 P.2d 760 (Okla. 1995). “15 O.S.1991, § 160. .The voluminous summary judgment record contains several of the involved insurance contracts, dating from 1957 to 1983.”
Pub. Serv. Co. of Oklahoma v. Home Builders Ass'n of Realtors, 554 P.2d 1181 (Okla. 1976). “15 O.S.1971 § 160 provides: The words of a contract are to be understood in their ordinary and popular sense, rather than according to their strict legal meaning, unless used by the parties in a techical sense, or unless a special meaning is given to them by usage, in which case…”
Shadoan v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 894 P.2d 1140 (Okla. Civ. App. 1995). “4; boldface original] “Business” is defined to include trade, profession, or occupation. [Id., Exh. A, p. 1.] Unless some technical sense is indicated, the words of a written contract are to be understood in their ordinary and popular sense, 15 O.”
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.