Okla. Stat. » Title 15 — CONTRACTS
Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 15, § 70 (2026)

Certain acts as acceptance

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

Performance of the conditions of a proposal, or the acceptance of the consideration offered with a proposal, is an acceptance of the proposal. R.L.1910, § 915.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1962–2026 · leading case: Baker Hughes Inc. v. S&S Chem., LLC, 836 F.3d 554 (6th Cir. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Baker Hughes Inc. v. S&S Chem., LLC, 836 F.3d 554 (6th Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “’ ” (quoting Okla. Stat. tit. 15, § 70 )). To constitute a valid acceptance, the response to an offer must be “unconditional” and “identical to the offer.”
Christ's Legacy Church v. Trinity Grp. Architects, 2018 OK CIV APP 31, 417 P.3d 1223. · cites it 2× “See also 15 O.S. 2011 § 70 ("Performance of the conditions of a proposal, or the acceptance of the consideration offered with a proposal, is an acceptance of the proposal.”
Dunbar Eng'g Corp. v. Rhinosystems, Inc., 2010 OK CIV APP 49, 232 P.3d 931. · cites it 2× “2006) (citing 15 O.S.2001 § 70, and the Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 19 (1981)).”
Hardin v. First Cash Fin. Servs., Inc., 465 F.3d 470 (10th Cir. 2006). “In general, Oklahoma follows traditional contract principles in permitting acceptance of an offer by performance: “Performance of the conditions of a proposal, or the acceptance of the consideration offered with a proposal, is an acceptance of the proposal.”
D. W. L., Inc. v. Goodner-Van Eng'g Co., 373 P.2d 38 (Okla. 1962). “Where an alleged principal claims that a person who negotiated a business deal was not in fact his agent at all, but was merely a volunteer, a self-constituted agent, or an agent for another, he will nevertheless be held bound by whatever obligations or liabilities were assumed…”
EEC, Inc. v. Baker Hughes Oilfield Operations, Inc., 460 F. App'x 731 (10th Cir. 2012). “3d at 476 (quoting Okla. Stat. tit. 15, § 70 ). Accordingly, we conclude that by calling out Baker’s equipment, EEC accepted the terms of the Az-iTrak Offer.”
Hall v. Armis, LLC, No. 4:24-cv-00402 (N.D. Okla. Mar. 6, 2025). · cites it 2× “” Okla. Stat. tit. 15, § 70 . Further, “[a] voluntary acceptance of the benefit of a transaction is equivalent to a consent to all obligations arising from it so far as the facts are known, or ought to be known to the person accepting.”
Wohlford v. Am. Auto Shield LLC, No. 5:22-cv-00520, 2023 WL 1107891 (W.D. Okla. Jan. 30, 2023). “2010); Okla. Stat. tit. 15, §§70 , 75). Fundamentally, Plaintiff does not dispute the existence of an arbitration agreement.”
Born v. Progrexion Teleservices, No. 2:20-cv-00107, 2020 WL 4674236 (D. Utah Aug. 11, 2020). “118 Okla. Stat. tit. 15, § 70 (emphasis added).”
Dugan, No. 5:25-cv-00157 (W.D. Okla. Mar. 30, 2026). “15 § 75; see also Okla. Stat. tit. 15 § 70 (“[A]cceptance of the consideration offered with a proposal, is an acceptance of the proposal.”
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.