Okla. Stat. » Title 20 — COURTS
Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 20, § 30.5 (2026)

Opinions - Publications

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

The Court of Civil Appeals shall effect disposition of cases assigned to it by a written opinion prepared in such form as the Supreme Court prescribes. No opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals shall be binding or cited as precedent unless it shall have been approved by the majority of the justices of the Supreme Court for publication in the official reporter. The Supreme Court shall direct which opinion or decision, if any, of the Court of Civil Appeals shall be published in the unofficial reporter. Opinions of

the Court of Civil Appeals which apply settled precedent and do not settle new questions of law shall not be released for publication in the official reporter. Added by Laws 1970, c. 247, § 5, emerg. eff. April 15, 1970. Amended by Laws 1971, c. 85, § 1, emerg. eff. April 16, 1971; Laws 1996, c. 97, § 6, eff. Nov. 1, 1996.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 48 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1990–2024 · leading case: Beyrer v. The Mule, 2021 OK 45 (Okla. 2021).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Beyrer v. The Mule, 2021 OK 45 (Okla. 2021). · cites it 3× “Any such opinion, however, bearing the notation "Approved for publication by the Supreme Court" has been so designated by the Supreme Court pursuant to 20 O.S. § 30.5, and shall be accorded precedential value.”
In the Matter of the Est. of Fulks, 2020 OK 94 (Okla. 2020). · cites it 3× “Title 20 O.S.2011 § 30.5; Rule 1.200, Oklahoma Supreme Court Rules, 12 O.”
Bryant v. Comm'r of the Dep't of Pub. Saf., 937 P.2d 496 (Okla. 1997). · cites it 3× “" Manning was not approved for publication by this Court; and it has no precedential value pursuant to 20 O.S.1991 § 30.5. [14] Although, we agree that the facts of Manning are strikingly similar to the present cause, the authority it relied on is not supportive and we do not…”
Lovelace v. Keohane, 831 P.2d 624 (Okla. 1992). · cites it 2× “See also, 20 O.S. § 30.5 (1971). In addressing the sufficiency of Lovelace's complaint, and her two-part argument as to legal disability and discovery of her injury the district court concluded this "two-stage speculation is too tenuous a foundation upon which to permit the…”
King Mfg. v. Meadows, 2005 OK 78 (Okla. 2005). “1; 20 O.S.2001 § 30.5; 20 O.S.2001 § 30.14. 10 .”
McQueen, Rains & Tresch, LLP v. CITGO Petroleum Corp., 2008 OK 66 (Okla. 2008). “1; 20 O.S.2001 §§ 30.5 and 30.14. [19] Wright v.”
Manley v. Brown, 1999 OK 79 (Okla. 1999). “A precedent-setting opinion is one that meets the criteria of 20 O.S.1991 § 30.5: ... No opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals shall be binding or cited as precedent unless it shall have been approved by the majority of the justices of the Supreme Court for publication in the…”
Barzellone v. Presley, 2005 OK 86 (Okla. 2005). “1; 20 O.S.2001 §§ 30.5 and 30.14. 59 . Title 28 O.”
White v. Heng Ly Lim, 2009 OK 79 (Okla. 2009). “3d 1170 in which common law claims were found to be applicable where the purchaser knew that the trustees were acting as trustees and were not owners/occupants of the property.”
Oklahoma Pub. Employees Ass'n v. State ex rel. Oklahoma Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 267 P.3d 838 (Okla. 2011). “1; 20 O.S.2001 §§ 30.5 and 30.14. . Holdings in cases released by the Court of Criminal Appeals are not binding upon this Court although the rules announced therein may be considered persuasive.”
Shaw v. AAA Eng'g & Drafting, Inc., 213 F.3d 519 (10th Cir. 2000). “12, Appendix 1, Rule 1.200(c)(2) (establishing that opinions of the Court of Civil Appeals ordered released for publication by that court but not by the Oklahoma Supreme Court have persuasive effect but are not accorded precedential value).”
Multiple Injury Trust Fund v. Wade, 2008 OK 15 (Okla. 2008). “eon within five (5) years from the date of filing thereof or within five (5) years from the date of last payment of compensation or wages in lieu thereof, same shall be barred as the basis of any claim for compensation under the Workers' Compensation Act and shall be dismissed…”
Show all 48 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.