Okla. Stat. » Title 61 — PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND PUBLIC WORKS
Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 61, § 101 (2026)

Short title

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

This act shall be known and may be cited as the "Public Competitive Bidding Act of 1974". Added by Laws 1974, c. 298, § 1, operative Aug. 1, 1974.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1980–2023 · leading case: Westinghouse Elec. Corp. v. Grand River Dam Auth., 720 P.2d 713 (Okla. 1986).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Westinghouse Elec. Corp. v. Grand River Dam Auth., 720 P.2d 713 (Okla. 1986). · cites it 4× “Bids were called for, and pursuant to 61 O.S.1981 § 101 et seq., the Public Competitive Bidding Act, GRDA selected WEC to supply the turbine generator, and Foster-Wheeler Corp.”
City of Broken Arrow v. Bass Pro Outdoor World, L.L.C., 2011 OK 1, 250 P.3d 305. “In so proceeding, the contractual obligations of the City were authorized by the Broken Arrow City Council in violation of the State of Oklahoma's Open Meeting Act (25 0.”
Hoar v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 1998 OK 95, 968 P.2d 1219. · cites it 2× “Shears’ state contract with the Oklahoma Department of Transportation was awarded pursuant to the Oklahoma Competitive Bidding Act, 61 O.S.1991 § 101 et seq. and 69 O.S.1991 § 1101.”
Boyle Servs., Inc. v. Dewberry Design Grp., Inc., 2001 OK CIV APP 63, 24 P.3d 878. “It argued the sole remedy for violations of the Oklahoma Competitive Bidding Act, 61 O.S.1991 § 101 et seq., is a suit to enjoin performance of a public contract brought within ten days of its execution as authorized by 61 O.”
Indep. Ins. Agents of Oklahoma, Inc. v. Oklahoma Tpk. Auth., 876 P.2d 675 (Okla. 1994). · cites it 2× “Finally, we address appellees’ argument that the Authority’s purchase of insurance for the OCIP violated § 103 of the Public Competitive Bidding Act, 61 O.S. § 101 et seq. Section 103 provides: All public construction contracts shall be let and awarded to the lowest responsible…”
Rollings Constr., Inc. v. Tulsa Metro. Water Auth., 745 P.2d 1176 (Okla. 1987). “The trial court held that the issuance of a “Contractor’s Pre-qualification Certificate” pursuant to city ordinance does not per se deprive the contracting authority of its discretion in awarding the bid to the “lowest responsible” bidder under the Public Competitive Bidding Act…”
United States Elevator Corp. v. City of Tulsa, 610 P.2d 791 (Okla. 1980). “The issue presented is whether the Public Competitive Bidding Act of 1974 (61 O.S. §§ 101 et seq.), insofar as it relates to the advertising, receiving bids and awarding public improvement contracts, applies to a “Home Rule” municipality which has charter provisions for…”
City of Broken Arrow v. Bass Pro Outdoor World, LLC, 2011 OK 1. “2001 § 307, 312), Competitive Bidding Act (61 O.S. § 101, et seq. and 62 O.S.Supp.2003 § 804) and Anti-Fraud statutes (15 O.”
Unibridge Sys., Inc. v. Patterson, 2017 OK CIV APP 32. · cites it 4× “1 Unibridge asserted, inter alia , that the Solicitation should have been let pursuant to the Oklahoma Public Competitive Bidding Act of 1974 (PCBA), 61 O.S.2011, § 101 et seq. , rather than the Oklahoma Central Purchasing Act (CPA), 74 O.”
Ark Wrecking Co. of Oklahoma v. Vargas Constr. Co., 2016 OK CIV APP 67, 394 P.3d 261. “The construction management contract gave Vargas the right to self-perform any of the work required for the project, and in such an event, Vargas was to be treated as any other bidder, including being subject to the Competitive Bidding Act, 61 O.S. §§ 101 et seq. ¶ 3 On December…”
ASI Constr. LLC v. Oklahoma City City of, No. 5:21-cv-01138, 2023 WL 4305131 (W.D. Okla. June 30, 2023). “The Public Competitive Bidding Act Defendants assert that Oklahoma’s Public Competitive Bidding Act (“PCBA”), Okla. Stat. tit. 61, § 101 , et seq., limits Plaintiff’s “remedy for compensation over and above the contract price” because the additional work and delays alleged by…”
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.