Okla. Stat. » Title 20 — COURTS
Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 20, § 1602 (2026)

Power to answer

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section OK-LEGoklegislature.gov JustiaOkla. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Power to Answer. The Supreme Court and the Court of Criminal Appeals may answer a question of law certified to it by a court of the United States, or by an appellate court of another state, or of a federally recognized Indian tribal government, or of Canada, a Canadian province or territory, Mexico, or a Mexican state, if the answer may be determinative of an issue in pending litigation in the certifying court and there is no controlling decision of the Supreme Court or Court of Criminal Appeals, constitutional provision, or statute of this state. Added by Laws 1973, c. 22, § 2, operative July 1, 1973. Amended by Laws 1991, c. 28, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1991; Laws 1997, c. 61, § 3, eff. Nov. 1, 1997.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 62 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1981–2025 · leading case: Hollaway v. UNUM Life Ins. Co. of Am., 2003 OK 90 (Okla. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Hollaway v. UNUM Life Ins. Co. of Am., 2003 OK 90 (Okla. 2003). · cites it 24× “Because the Miller opinion alters the test in causes previously considered by the Tenth Circuit and because pursuant to 20 O.S.2001 § 1602, [2] this Court has authority to answer any question which may be determinative of an issue in the cause, we answer a single question, as…”
Pino v. United States, 507 F.3d 1233 (10th Cir. 2007). · cites it 2× “” Okla. Stat. tit. 20, § 1602 . Under our own federal jurisprudence, we will not trouble our sister state courts every time an arguably unsettled question of state law comes across our desks.”
Local 514 Transp. Workers Union v. Keating, 2003 OK 110 (Okla. 2003). · cites it 4× “Under the certified question statute, 20 O.S.2001 § 1602, we may give a federal court our answer solely on the issues of state law.”
Colony Ins. Co. v. Burke, 698 F.3d 1222 (10th Cir. 2012). “” Okla. Stat. tit. 20, § 1602 . Accordingly, this Court will “employ the device in circumstances where the question before us (1) may be determinative of the case at hand and (2) is sufficiently novel that we feel uncomfortable attempting to decide it without further guidance.”
Siloam Springs Hotel, LLC v. Century Sur. Co., 2017 OK 14 (Okla. 2017). · cites it 5× “This Court's discretionary power to answer is set out in 20 O.S. 2011 § 1602, which provides: The Supreme Court and the Court of Criminal Appeals may answer a question of law certified to it by a court of the United States, or by an appellate court of another state, or of a…”
Ball v. Wilshire Ins. Co., 2007 OK 80 (Okla. 2007). · cites it 2× “[9] Ball urges us to answer the questions arguing that, even if the Tenth Circuit declines the appeal, our opinion would not be advisory as the questions certified are first impression and will settle an undetermined area of state law that will affect this case and all others…”
City of Moore, Oklahoma, a Mun. Corp. v. Atchison, Topeka, & Santa Fe Ry. Co., a R.R. Corp., 699 F.2d 507 (10th Cir. 1983). · cites it 2× “Since the city did not controvert that contention, the amount in controversy requirement is met. The district court had jurisdiction over the declaratory judgment action.”
United States v. Burkley, 513 F.3d 1183 (10th Cir. 2008). “” Okla. Stat. tit. 20, § 1602 (2002). However, “[w]e generally will not certify questions to a state supreme court when the requesting party seeks certification only after having received an adverse decision from the district court.”
McKellips v. Saint Francis Hosp., Inc., 741 P.2d 467 (Okla. 1987). “On June 3, 1986, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit certified the following two questions of law to this Court pursuant to the Uniform Certification of Questions of Law Act, 20 O.S.1981 § 1602: I. In a medical malpractice action under Oklahoma law, absent…”
Burleson v. Saffle, 2002 OK CR 15 (Okla. Crim. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “NOTES [1] 20 O.S.Supp.1997, § 1602. [2] 21 O.S.Supp.”
Max True Plastering Co. v. United States Fid. & Guar. Co., 912 P.2d 861 (Okla. 1996). “Title 20 O.S.1991 § 1602 provides in pertinent part: "The Supreme Court .”
McQueen, Rains & Tresch, LLP v. CITGO Petroleum Corp., 2008 OK 66 (Okla. 2008). “[7] Title 20 O.S.2001 § 1602 providing in pertinent part: "Power to Answer: The Supreme Court .”
Show all 62 citing cases →
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.