Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 15, § 168 (2026)

Repugnancy - How reconciled

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section OK-LEGoklegislature.gov JustiaOkla. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Repugnancy in a contract must be reconciled, if possible, by such an interpretation as will give some effect to the repugnant clause, subordinate to the general intent and purposes of the whole contract. R.L.1910, § 962.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1988–2023 · leading case: Golsen v. ONG W., Inc., 756 P.2d 1209 (Okla. 1988).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Golsen v. ONG W., Inc., 756 P.2d 1209 (Okla. 1988). “To do so would not accord with the statutory authority last mentioned or 15 O.S.1981 § 168. In Paclawski v. Bristol Laboratories, Inc.”

WLM Retail Trust v. Tramlaw Remainderman Ltd. P'ship, 2018 IL App (1st) 170819 (Ill. App. Ct. 2018). “" Okla. Stat. tit. 15, § 168 (2011). Thus, "[w]ords in a contract which are wholly inconsistent with its nature, or with the main intention of the parties, are to be rejected.”

Samson Resources Co. v. Quarles Drilling Co., 783 P.2d 974 (Okla. Civ. App. 1989). “15 O.S.1981 §§ 168, 169. We therefore hold that Appellee may not escape liability for its own negligence or intentional acts under the exculpatory clause of the contract.”

Midcon Data Servs. LLC v. Ovintiv Servs. Inc (W.D. Okla. 2023). “20 Okla. Stat. tit. 15, § 155 . See Mercury Inv.”

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.