Okla. Stat. » Title 63 — PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY
Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 63, § 1-106 (2026)

See the following versions:

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

OS 63-1-106v1 (SB 949, Laws 2025, c. 215, § 13) OS 63-1-106v2 (HB 2013, Laws 2025, c. 377, § 3)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1993–2007 · leading case: Finstuen v. Crutcher, 496 F.3d 1139 (10th Cir. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Finstuen v. Crutcher, 496 F.3d 1139 (10th Cir. 2007). · cites it 4× “Okla. Stat. tit. 63, § 1-106 (A). We are satisfied that Dr.”
DuLaney v. Oklahoma State Dep't of Health, 868 P.2d 676 (Okla. 1993). · cites it 2× “Pursuant to 63 O.S.Supp. 1987 § 1-106, the Commissioner of Health is given broad administrative duties to execute and enforce rules, regulations and standards adopted by the Board of Health.”
Davis v. Fieker, 1997 OK 156, 952 P.2d 505. · cites it 2× “[13] Okla.Stat. tit. 63, § 1-106(B)(2) (1991).”
Clonts v. State ex rel. Dep't of Health, 2005 OK 66, 124 P.3d 224. “The Department asserted power and jurisdiction to issue the order pursuant to provisions of 63 O.S.2001, §§ 1-106(B)(4), 1-821, 1-830, 1-840 and 63 O.”
Caddell v. State ex rel. Dep't of Health, 896 P.2d 571 (Okla. Civ. App. 1995). “” 63 O.S.1991 § 1-106(b)(11). The trial court accepted this argument in rendering judgment for ODH.”
Okla. Stat. tit. 63, § 1-106(B)(2): 1 case
Davis v. Fieker, 1997 OK 156, 952 P.2d 505. “[13] Okla.Stat. tit. 63, § 1-106(B)(2) (1991).”
Okla. Stat. tit. 63, § 1-106(B)(4): 1 case
Clonts v. State ex rel. Dep't of Health, 2005 OK 66, 124 P.3d 224. “The Department asserted power and jurisdiction to issue the order pursuant to provisions of 63 O.S.2001, §§ 1-106(B)(4), 1-821, 1-830, 1-840 and 63 O.”
Okla. Stat. tit. 63, § 1-106(b)(11): 1 case
Caddell v. State ex rel. Dep't of Health, 896 P.2d 571 (Okla. Civ. App. 1995). “” 63 O.S.1991 § 1-106(b)(11). The trial court accepted this argument in rendering judgment for ODH.”
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.