Copy Of Courts And More Leaderboards 5
Vol. 1 | No. 4 | Jan 27, 2021
Courts And More Leaderboards

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

2021 OK 5, 119220 | Decided: 01/26/2021

¶0 Voters in the City of Enid presented a recall petition to City of Enid officials. The petition sought to recall the plaintiff/appellant, City Commissioner, Ben Ezzell, for his support of a city wide mask mandate to combat the COVID epidemic. Ezzell filed an objection to the recall petition in the District Court of Garfield County. The City of Enid City Charter, Part D, Art. II, §6 applies state general election laws to city elections, unless the state laws conflict with the charter provisions. Ezzell alleged that because the recall petition did not comply with the requirements of 34 O.S. 2011 §3 and 34 O.S. Supp. 2015 §6 which relate to signature collection, the recall petition was insufficient. After a hearing, the trial court denied Ezzell's protest and determined that the petition was sufficient under the City Charter of Enid recall process. Ezzell appealed, and we retained the cause to determine whether these state statutes are applicable to this cause, and if so, whether the failure to follow them rendered the recall petition insufficient. We hold that: 1) because there is no conflict between the City Charter recall process, and the additional state requirements, 34 O.S. 2011 §3 and 34 O.S. Supp. 2015 §6 , the state statutes governed, but were not properly followed; and 2) the recall petition is insufficient on its face pursuant to Clapsaddle v. Blevins , 1998 OK 5 , 66 P.3d 352 , and its predecessors. CAUSE PREVIOUSLY RETAINED; TRIAL COURT REVERSED.

2021 OK 4, 115807 | Decided 01/26/2021

¶0 Plaintiffs held an overriding royalty interest in oil and gas produced under mineral leases executed in 1973. In 2012, defendant began producing oil and gas from a new geologic formation on lands covered under those same leases. Plaintiffs sought payment of their share of royalty from the new production, defendant refused, and plaintiffs brought this lawsuit. Finding they continued to hold a valid overriding royalty interest under the 1973 leases, the district court granted judgment to the plaintiffs after a bench trial. The Court of Civil Appeals, however, reversed after determining that a statute of limitations barred plaintiffs' claims in full due to a purported cloud on their interest arising from subsequently recorded oil-and-gas leases. Because the later-recorded leases did not reasonably give plaintiffs notice of any interest adverse to their own, we hold that their cause of action did not accrue until defendant refused to pay royalties on the new production in 2012. Plaintiffs filed a timely lawsuit. On certiorari granted upon plaintiffs' petition ...


2021 OK 3, 118913 | Decided 01/26/2021

¶0 Petitioners brought this action seeking declaratory relief that Respondent lacked authority to enter into two tribal gaming compacts on behalf of the State. The Court assumes original jurisdiction and grants the declaratory relief sought by Petitioners that the two tribal gaming compacts are invalid under Oklahoma law. ORIGINAL JURISDICTION ASSUMED AND DECLARATORY RELIEF GRANTED.


Decided: 01/21/2021


2021 OK 1, SCBD-6896 Decided 01/19/2021
¶0 Complainant, State of Oklahoma ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Association, charged Respondent, Tara K. Jack, with three counts of professional misconduct, all involving her failure to properly supervise nonlawyer employees under her direct supervision and allowing them to engage in the unauthorized practice of law. The Professional Responsibility Tribunal recommended Respondent be publicly censured. We hold there is clear and convincing evidence that the totality of Respondent's conduct warrants public censure. Respondent is ordered to pay the costs as herein provided within ninety days after this opinion becomes final.

Court of Criminal Appeals in the State of Oklahoma

Quincy West v. State of Oklahoma

Appellant Quincy West was tried by jury for the crimes of Conspiracy (Counts 1, 2), Robbery by Force or Fear (Count 3), Kidnapping (Count 4), Human Trafficking (Count 5), Unauthorized Use of a Motor Vehicle (Count 6), Use of a Vehicle in the Discharge of a Weapon (Counts 7, 8), and Discharge of a Firearm into a Dwelling (Counts 9-12, 14-16), in the District Court of Jackson County, Case No. CF-2017-155. In accordance with the jury’s recommendation the trial court sentenced Appellant to five years imprisonment and a fine of $2,000.00 (Count 1); nine years imprisonment and a fine of $2,000.00 (Count 2); ten years imprisonment (Count 3); twenty years imprisonment (Count 4); life imprisonment and a fine of $100,000.00 (Count 5); three years imprisonment and a fine of $2,000.00 (Count 6); ten years imprisonment (Count 7); twenty-five years imprisonment (Count 8), and eighteen years imprisonment (Count 9). The trial court merged Counts 10 and 11 into Count 10, and sentenced Appellant to eighteen years imprisonment (Count 10). The trial court also merged Counts 12, 14, 15 and 16 into Count 12, and sentenced Appellant to eighteen years imprisonment (Count 12). The sentences on all counts run consecutively, with credit for time served. From this judgment and sentence Quincy West has perfected his appeal. Judgment and Sentence AFFIRMED; case REMANDED for proceedings consistent with this Opinion. OPINION BY: KUEHN, P.J.: ROWLAND, V.P.J., CONCUR; LUMPKIN, J., CONCUR; LEWIS, J., CONCUR; HUDSON, J., CONCUR. Jan. 21, 2021.

Jerry Steven Gonzales v. State of Oklahoma

Appellant Jerry Steven Gonzales was tried by jury and convicted of the crimes of Counts 1-16 and 22-25 – Sexual Abuse of a Child and Count 18 – Possession of Obscene Material. In accordance with the jury’s recommendation the trial court sentenced Appellant to one year imprisonment and a fine of $5,000 in Count 1, life imprisonment on each of Counts 2-16 and 22-25; and 20 years imprisonment in Count 18. From this judgment and sentence Jerry Steven Gonzales has perfected his appeal. AFFIRMED. OPINION BY: KUEHN, P.J.: ROWLAND, V.P.J., CONCUR; LUMPKIN, J., CONCUR; LEWIS, J., CONCUR; HUDSON, J., CONCUR. Jan 21, 2021

Sharonne Antonio Jackson v. The State of Oklahoma

Sharonne Antonio Jackson, Appellant, was tried by jury for the crime of Felony Murder in the First Degree While in Commission of Robbery with a Dangerous Weapon (Count 1) and Felon in Possession of a Firearm (Count 2) in Case No. CF-2018-336 in the District Court of Oklahoma County. The jury returned verdicts of guilty and set as punishment life imprisonment without the possibility of parole on Count 1 and ten years imprisonment on Count 2. The trial court sentenced accordingly and ordered the sentences to be served consecutively. From this judgment and sentence Sharonne Antonio Jackson has perfected his appeal. AFFIRMED. Appellant’s motion to supplement record or for an evidentiary hearing is DENIED. OPINION BY: Rowland, V.P.J.; Kuehn, P.J., concurs; Lumpkin, J., concurs; Lewis, J., concurs in results; Hudson, J., concurs. Jan 21, 2021

Nico Esteban Labelle v. The State of Oklahoma

Nico Esteban Labelle, Petitioner, pled guilty to two counts of violation of a protective order in Case Nos. CF-2019-6 and CF-2019-24 in the District Court of Woodward County. The Honorable Celo J. Harrell, Associate District Judge, found Petitioner guilty and sentenced him to three years imprisonment on each count to be served concurrently. Petitioner filed a timely application to withdraw plea which was denied after hearing. Petitioner now seeks the writ of certiorari. The Petition for the Writ of Certiorari is DENIED. The Judgment and Sentence is AFFIRMED. OPINION BY: Lewis, J.; Kuehn, P.J., concurs; Rowland, V.P.J., concurs; Lumpkin, J., concurs; Hudson, J., concurs. Jan 21, 2020

Jose Abraham Sanchez v. The State of Oklahoma
On June 1, 2012, Appellant was sentenced to five years imprisonment, with all but four weekends suspended. On March 21, 2017, the State filed an Amended Motion to Revoke Suspended Sentence. On August 7, 2019, the State filed a Second Amended Motion to Revoke Suspended Sentence. Following a revocation hearing the Honorable Lori Walkley, District Judge, revoked Appellant’s remaining suspended sentence in full. The revocation of Appellant’s suspended sentence in Cleveland County District Court Case No. CF-2009-183 is AFFIRMED and this matter is REMANDED to the District Court of Cleveland County for issuance of an amended revocation order MODIFYING the revocation to six months. OPINION BY: LEWIS, J. KUEHN, P.J.: Concur ROWLAND, V.P.J.: Concur LUMPKIN, J.: Concur in Result HUDSON, J.: Concur Jan 21, 2021

Kerry Orlando Payne v. The State of Oklahoma
KERRY ORLANDO PAYNE, Appellant, was tried by jury, in Case No. CF-2015-5404, in the District Court of Tulsa County, for the crimes of Counts 1—3: Shooting with Intent to Kill; Count 4: Felon in Possession of a Firearm; and Count 5: First Degree Murder. The jury recommended a sentence of life imprisonment each on Counts 1—3; twenty years imprisonment on Count 4; and life imprisonment without the possibility of parole on Count 5. The Honorable William D. LaFortune, District Judge, sentenced Payne in accordance with the jury’s verdicts. Judge LaFortune ordered Payne’s sentences to run consecutively. From this judgment and sentence KERRY ORLANDO PAYNE has perfected his appeal. The Judgment and Sentence of the District Court is AFFIRMED. Appellant’s Application to Supplement the Appeal Record or, In the Alternative, Request for Evidentiary Hearing Pursuant to Rule 3.11 on Sixth Amendment Claim of Ineffective Assistance of Counsel is DENIED. OPINION BY: Hudson, J.; Kuehn, P.J., Concurs; Rowland, V.P.J., Concurs; Lumpkin, J., Concurs; Lewis, J., Concurs in Results. Jan. 21, 2021
Sue Ann Weemes v. State of Oklahoma
Appellant, Sue Ann Weemes, was convicted following a jury trial in the District Court of Bryan County, Case No. CM-2019-502, of Driving While Impaired. The Honorable Abby Rogers, Special Judge, fined Appellant $500.00 and sentenced her to three months in the Bryan County Jail. Appellant appeals from the Judgment and Sentence imposed. Judgment and Sentence AFFIRMED. OPINION BY: HUDSON, JUDGE; KUEHN, P.J., Concurs; ROWLAND, V.P.J., Concurs; LUMPKIN, J., Concurs in Results; LEWIS, J., Concurs. Jan 21, 2021

Jonathan David Moran v. The State of Oklahoma
JONATHAN DAVID MORAN, Petitioner, entered a blind guilty plea, in Case No. C-2020-53, in the District Court of Lincoln County, before the Honorable Cynthia Ferrell Ashwood, District Judge, to Counts 1—7: Child Sexual Abuse; Count 8: Child Abuse by Injury; and Count 9: Child Neglect. After a hearing Judge Ashwood sentenced Moran to forty years imprisonment and a $500.00 fine on each count. Judge Ashwood ordered Moran’s sentences to run concurrently and further imposed various costs and fees. Moran filed multiple pro se motions to withdraw his pleas. Moran filed his first motion on November 6, 2019, prior to sentencing. He later withdrew this motion at a hearing held on December 5, 2019. On December 18, 2019, following sentencing, Moran filed a second pro se motion to withdraw his pleas. After a hearing, Judge Ashwood denied Moran’s motion to withdraw his pleas. Petitioner then filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari. The Petition for Writ of Certiorari is DENIED. The Judgment and Sentence of the District Court is AFFIRMED. OPINION BY: Hudson, J.; Kuehn, P.J., Concurs; Rowland, V.P.J., Concurs; Lumpkin, J., Concurs; Lewis, J., Concurs. Jan. 21, 2021

Court of Civil Appeals in the State of Oklahoma

No published opinions this week. 

Copy Of Courts And More Leaderboards 6



118,352 - Central Park Owners’ Association, Inc., Plaintiff/Appellee, v. C.J. Morony, a/k/a Carl Morony , Defendant/Appellant, and Jane Doe, Spouse of C.J. Morony, if married; occupant(s) of the premises at 450 West 7th Street, Unit 1521; J. Dennis Semler, County Treasurer for Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Plaintiff/Appellee, Central Park Owners Association, Inc. (Creditor) objected to the homestead exemption claim filed by Defendant/Appellant, C.J. Morony, a/k/a Carl Morony (Debtor). Creditor has a judgment against Debtor in the amount of $110,525.10, inclusive of attorney fees. Creditor sought to execute on its judgment lien by noticing Debtor of a Sheriff’s sale of Debtor’s eight-story, 58,496 square foot, high-rise office building located in the downtown business district of Tulsa, Oklahoma (the Sinclair Building). Debtor objected to the sale claiming he used and occupied the Sinclair Building as his residence; thus, the Sinclair Building qualified for homestead exemption under Okla. Const. Art. XII, §1(C) and 31 O.S. 2011 §2(C) and was exempt from forced sale. The trial court found Debtor personally resides on the top two floors; the remaining floors are empty or have commercial tenants or offices; and Debtor uses less than 75% of the property as his personal residence. The court also found Debtor claimed this exemption in previous litigation and was unsuccessful. Based on these findings, the court held the Sinclair Building is non-exempt and is not homestead as defined by Okla. Const., Art. 12, §1 and 31 O.S. 2011 §2(C). The trial court held the Sinclair Building is collectible for satisfaction for Creditor’s money judgments against Debtor. On appeal, this Court holds Debtor may claim the top two floors of the Sinclair building as his homestead, but the remaining floors of the Sinclair Building are non-exempt. The trial court’s order is affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded for further proceedings. Opinion by BELL, J., SWINTON, C.J., concurs and PEMBERTON, P.J., dissents. Jan. 22, 2021
118,148 - Brian Allen, Brian Backer, Malissa Backer, Matt Beavers, Leslie Beavers, Steve Blankenship, Linda Camp, Michael A. Daniels, Steve Daniel, Keith Dejarnatt, Ilona Griggs, Terry Jeanes, Kay Jeanes, Lloyd C. Johnson, Gary Lane, Theresa Lane, Mary Ann Marino, Patrick B. Marino, Tommy S. McDaniel, Mark McDaniel, Kerri S. McDaniel, Todd McDaniel, Rodney Pratt, Pamela Pratt, Vojai A. Reed, Chad Sergent, Masheli Sergent, Lou Ann Smith, Walter Smith, Jo Carole Smith, Joe Bob Smith, Danny Stovall, Thomas J. Verace, Debra Verace, William D. Wade, Marilyn Wade, Sharon Ward, Lewis Whitten, and John Zimmerman, Plaintiffs/Appellees, vs. City of Broken Bow, Defendant/Appellant. Appeal from an Order of the District Court of McCurtain County, Hon. Jana Wallace, Trial Judge. The City of Broken Bow appeals a trial court order finding that Broken Bow City Ordinance No. 386 annexing a portion of Hochatown to be invalid. After a thorough review of the record and applicable law, we see no error in the decision reached by the trial court and affirm pursuant to Oklahoma Supreme Court Rule 1.202(d), 12 O.S. Supp. 2019, ch. 15, app. 1. Our summary affirmance of the issues discussed is dispositive of any remaining issues on appeal. SUMMARILY AFFIRMED UNDER RULE 1.202(d). Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division II, by RAPP, J.; BARNES, P.J., and FISCHER, J., concur. Jan. 20, 2021
118,439 - Shannon Paul Dawson, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Cassie Kay Dawson, Respondent/Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa, County, Oklahoma. Honorable Clifford J. Smith, Trial Judge. Shannon Dawson (“Father”) seeks review of the Tulsa County District Court’s October 28, 2019 order denying his Motion for New Trial and awarding an attorney fee in favor of Father, in the amount of $800.00. This appeal concerns issues raised by Father asserting: (1) The trial court abused its discretion in terminating the joint custody agreement Father and his ex-wife, Cassie Dawson (“Mother”), entered into at the time of their divorce in 2016 and (2) The the trial court erred in its determination of Father’s entitlement to an attorney fee award and the amount of the award, which Father claims was inadequate and made in violation of his due process. Based on the applicable standards of review and the record presented, we AFFIRM. Opinion by PEMBERTON, P.J.; SWINTON, C.J., and BELL, J., concur. Jan. 22, 2021
118,509 - Kenneth Jackson and Karen Jackson, Plaintiffs/Appellees, v. Robert Maxey and Dorthy Maxey, Husband and Wife, Defendants/Appellants. Appeal from the District Court of Sequoyah County, Oklahoma. Honorable Kyle S. Waters, Trial Judge. At its core, this case concerns a dispute about whether or not Robert and Dorthy Maxey, neighbors to the south of Kenneth Jackson and Karen Jackson (although not adjoining neighbors), should be required to close and lock a gate at the entrance to a rural road running through the Jacksons’ property to the Maxeys’ property. To reach that central issue, we must first determine if the Maxeys have a legal right to access the road on the Jacksons’ property. At least based on the legal arguments presented, the Maxeys do not have any such legal right. The trial court found similarly. Therefore, we affirm. Opinion by PEMBERTON, P.J.; SWINTON, C.J., and BELL, J., concur. Jan. 22, 2021

Copy Of Courts And More Leaderboards 4

Bar Members Celebrate Milestone Anniversaries in 2024

The Oklahoma Bar Association congratulates these members who reach significant milestone anniversaries in 2024. 70 YearsOKLAHOMA COUNTY George Tony Blankenship, Nichols Hills J. Thornton Wright, Oklahoma City  ROGERS COUNTY Jack K. Mayberry, Claremore  OUT OF STATE O. Malcolm Harper, Glendale, CA Donald E. Lambdin, Maize, KS Fred R. Harris, Corrales, NM Arthur Wayne Breeland, Dallas, TX David Christopher Reid, Oakton, VA Don Edward VanDall, Cheyenne, WY …


Jenks High School Named Mock Trial State Champion

Jenks High School’s Team Courtroom Crusaders edged out Oklahoma City’s Academy of Classical Christian Studies to claim the Oklahoma High Schoo Mock Trial Championship. This is the second time Jenks High School has won the championship and the first time the Academy of Classical Christian Studies has made it to the final round of competition. …


The OBA Calendar

« Jun 2024 » loading...
Thu 20

Indian Law Section Virtual Meeting

June 20 @ 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm
Fri 21

Lawyers Helping Lawyers Committee Meeting

June 21 @ 12:00 pm - 1:30 pm
Wed 26

Juvenile Law Section Meeting/CLE

June 26 @ 12:00 pm - 1:30 pm
Jim's LPT Blog

Artificial Intelligence: Shaping the Future of Law Practice

Learn More About AI at the July 12 Conference By Jim Calloway As technology continues to transform every sector, the legal profession is no exception. The Oklahoma Bar Association understands the importance of staying ahead of the curve and harnessing the power of emerging technologies. With that in mind, we are pleased to announce our…


Whether you are hiring, looking for a career move, offering office space or searching for a service - let the OBA Classified service help. For advertising rates and details, at advertising@okbar.org, or by telephone (405) 416-7018.