Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 23, § 7 (2026)

Jury may allow interest

✓ current as of July 2026

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

In an action for the breach of an obligation not arising from contract, and in every case of oppression, fraud or malice, interest may be given in the discretion of the jury. R.L. 1910, § 2849.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1978–2006 · leading case: Chellen v. John Pickle Co., Inc., 446 F. Supp. 2d 1247 (N.D. Okla. 2006).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Chellen v. John Pickle Co., Inc., 446 F. Supp. 2d 1247 (N.D. Okla. 2006). “Okla. Stat. tit. 23, § 7 provides: “In an action for the breach of an obligation not arising from contract, and in every case of oppression, fraud or malice, interest may be given in the discretion of the jury.”

Barnes v. McKinney, 589 P.2d 698 (Okla. Civ. App. 1979). “All this was detriment arising from defendant’s failure to construct the addition in a contractually required workmanlike manner — a cause of action no longer in the lawsuit.”

Chellen v. John Pickle Co., Inc., 434 F. Supp. 2d 1069 (N.D. Okla. 2006). “Okla. Stat. tit. 23, § 7 provides: “In an action for the breach of an obligation not arising from contract, and in every case of oppression, fraud or malice, interest may be given in the discretion of the jury.”

King v. Sw. Cotton Oil Co., 585 P.2d 385 (Okla. Civ. App. 1978). “On the basis of the foregoing, we need not consider appellees’ counter-proposition II and counter-proposition III requesting prejudgment interest on the basis of 23 O.S.1971 § 7 and 23 O.S.1971 § 22 respectively.”

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.