Okla. Stat. » Title 74 — STATE GOVERNMENT
Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 74, § 840-2.5 (2026)

Repealed by Laws 2022, c. 243, § 27, emerg. eff. May

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

11, 2022.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1995–2021 · leading case: Dr. William P. Harman v. Univ. of Tennessee, 353 S.W.3d 734 (Tenn. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Dr. William P. Harman v. Univ. of Tennessee, 353 S.W.3d 734 (Tenn. 2011). · cites it 2× “2011)); Oklahoma ( Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 74, § 840-2.5 (E)(1) (Supp.”
Wholey v. Roebuck, 803 A.2d 482 (Md. 2002). “Stat § 126-17 (2001) and § 126-(84-88)(2001)(public protection for reporting improper government activities); Okla. Stat tit. 74 § 840-2.5 (2002,)(public employees); R.”
Oklahoma Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. McCrady, 2007 OK 39 (Okla. 2007). “In his OMPC paperwork entitled "Petition for Appeal” McCrady alleges violations of the following provisions of the Oklahoma Personnel Act (OPA): 74 O.S.2001 §§ 840-2.5, 840-6.2(c), 840-6.”
Vasek v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 2008 OK 35 (Okla. 2008). “Okla. Stat. tit. 74, § 840-2.5 (Supp.2007).”
Hayes v. Eateries, Inc., 905 P.2d 778 (Okla. 1995). “Our decision in Vannerson appears consistent with the present legislative policy expressed in regard to the disciplining of State agency employees found at 74 O.S.Supp.1994, § 840-2.5(A)(1-4), as amended by 1995 0kla.”
Burgess v. State Ex Rel Okla. Dept. of Env't Quality, 2019 OK CIV APP 7 (Okla. Civ. App. 2018). · cites it 8× “¶7 Burgess appealed her discharge to the MPC, asserting she was unlawfully terminated in violation of the Oklahoma Whistleblower Act, 74 O.S.2011, § 840-2.5. The case was assigned to an administrative law judge (ALJ).”
Poff v. State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Dep't of Mental Health & Substance Abuse Servs., 683 F. App'x 691 (10th Cir. 2017). · cites it 2× “The district court dismissed this claim because the Oklahoma Whistleblower Act, Okla. Stat. tit. 74, § 840-2.5 , provides an adequate remedy.”
Rouse v. Grand River Dam Auth., 326 P.3d 1139 (Okla. 2014). “3d at 291 (citing 74 O.S.Supp.2008, § 840-2.5(G) and (H); identical to the current version, 74 0.”
Rouse v. Grand River Dam Auth., 2014 OK 39 (Okla. 2014). · cites it 5× “The Oklahoma Whistleblower Act, 74 O.S.2011, § 840-2.5 applies to "any state employee" aggrieved pursuant to the Act, and provides for proceedings before the Merit Protection Commission to seek relief for an alleged violation of the Act.”
Oklahoma Emp. Sec. Comm'n v. Oklahoma Merit Prot. Comm'n, 900 P.2d 470 (Okla. Civ. App. 1995). “74 O.S.Supp.1994 § 840-2.5(E). If the investigation reveals that the employee’s performance was unsatisfactory in the promoted position and the employee is returned to his same position or one in the same class where he had successfully performed, the Merit Protection Commission…”
Andrews v. Oklahoma Workers Comp. Comm'n (W.D. Okla. 2021). · cites it 4× “Okla. Stat. tit. 74 § 840-2.5; Doc. No. 11 at 19.”
Rhoades v. Stitt (W.D. Okla. 2021). · cites it 2× “” Okla. Stat. tit. 74 § 840-2.5(A). When explaining the type of conduct that is covered by the Whistleblower Act, it provides that [n]o officer or employee of any state agency shall prohibit or take disciplinary action against employees of such agency […] for […] 2.”
Show all 16 citing cases →
Okla. Stat. tit. 74, § 840-2.5(A): 2 cases
Hayes v. Eateries, Inc., 905 P.2d 778 (Okla. 1995). “Our decision in Vannerson appears consistent with the present legislative policy expressed in regard to the disciplining of State agency employees found at 74 O.S.Supp.1994, § 840-2.5(A)(1-4), as amended by 1995 0kla.”
Rhoades v. Stitt (W.D. Okla. 2021). “” Okla. Stat. tit. 74 § 840-2.5(A). When explaining the type of conduct that is covered by the Whistleblower Act, it provides that [n]o officer or employee of any state agency shall prohibit or take disciplinary action against employees of such agency […] for […] 2.”
Okla. Stat. tit. 74, § 840-2.5(B): 2 cases
Andrews v. Oklahoma Workers Comp. Comm'n (W.D. Okla. 2021). “Okla. Stat. tit. 74 § 840-2.5; Doc. No. 11 at 19.”
Rhoades v. Stitt (W.D. Okla. 2021). “” Okla. Stat. tit. 74 § 840-2.5(A). When explaining the type of conduct that is covered by the Whistleblower Act, it provides that [n]o officer or employee of any state agency shall prohibit or take disciplinary action against employees of such agency […] for […] 2.”
Okla. Stat. tit. 74, § 840-2.5(B)(2): 1 case
Andrews v. Oklahoma Workers Comp. Comm'n (W.D. Okla. 2021). “Okla. Stat. tit. 74 § 840-2.5; Doc. No. 11 at 19.”
Okla. Stat. tit. 74, § 840-2.5(E): 1 case
Oklahoma Emp. Sec. Comm'n v. Oklahoma Merit Prot. Comm'n, 900 P.2d 470 (Okla. Civ. App. 1995). “74 O.S.Supp.1994 § 840-2.5(E). If the investigation reveals that the employee’s performance was unsatisfactory in the promoted position and the employee is returned to his same position or one in the same class where he had successfully performed, the Merit Protection Commission…”
Okla. Stat. tit. 74, § 840-2.5(E)(1): 1 case
Dr. William P. Harman v. Univ. of Tennessee, 353 S.W.3d 734 (Tenn. 2011). “2011)); Oklahoma ( Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 74, § 840-2.5 (E)(1) (Supp.”
Okla. Stat. tit. 74, § 840-2.5(G): 2 cases
Rouse v. Grand River Dam Auth., 326 P.3d 1139 (Okla. 2014). “3d at 291 (citing 74 O.S.Supp.2008, § 840-2.5(G) and (H); identical to the current version, 74 0.”
Rouse v. Grand River Dam Auth., 2014 OK 39 (Okla. 2014). “The Oklahoma Whistleblower Act, 74 O.S.2011, § 840-2.5 applies to "any state employee" aggrieved pursuant to the Act, and provides for proceedings before the Merit Protection Commission to seek relief for an alleged violation of the Act.”
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.