THE OKLAHOMA BAR JOURNAL 14 | APRIL 2026 which shall be appealable to the Oklahoma Supreme Court.65 An extension of the nonjury trial disposition period must be memorialized in writing by all parties and approved by the court.66 Whether the parties have a right to trial by jury may depend on the relief sought. Where damages are sought, the $500,000 minimum amount in controversy will apply, and the parties will have a right to a jury trial.67 If equitable relief is sought, including derivative actions, the $500,000 minimum will not apply, and litigants will not have a right to a jury trial.68 Filing/fees. The Oklahoma Supreme Court is required to provide for electronic filing of documents in the business courts of this state and shall promulgate rules for the filing of documents transmitted by electronic devices.69 A fee of $1,500 shall be charged and collected by the court clerk at the time of filing any action in, or upon the filing of a motion for removal to, a business court division.70 LITIGATION TO BLOCK SB 632 On June 26, 2025, two Oklahoma attorneys (the petitioners) filed an action in the Oklahoma Supreme Court asking the court to assume original jurisdiction, declare SB 632 unconstitutional and enjoin the act’s effectiveness.71 The court assumed original jurisdiction, heard the matter on July 15, 2025, and issued a temporary stay.72 The court issued its opinion on Oct. 7, 2025.73 After disposing of the procedural issues of assuming original jurisdiction and the standing of petitioners, the court held that SB 632 is unconstitutional. The court ruled that business courts are divisions within the district courts and must operate within the constitutional framework of the district courts.74 Since business court judges are district court judges, they must be appointed, serve terms and be elected like other district court judges. In SB 632, they are not. The bill provides for appointment by the governor from a nominee list from the speaker of the House. Under the Oklahoma Constitution, district court judges are nominated by the Judicial Nominating Commission.75 The JNC operates as a nonpartisan committee vested with the authority to determine whether applicants for judicial vacancies meet the requisite qualifications. From each pool of applicants for a vacant judicial office, the JNC nominates three candidates, from whom the governor appoints one.76 Under SB 632, business court judges would serve eightyear terms with reappointment by the governor. The constitutional protocol, however, provides for a four-year term77 at the end of which the district court judge stands for election.78 Under the court’s reasoning, business court judges would also presumably receive the same compensation as other district court judges.79 CONCLUSION With the passage of SB 632, Oklahoma intended to join the ranks of the business court movement. The advantages of the specialized courts – quicker decisions, lower costs and more predictable outcomes – have proven popular. Since the court has determined SB 632 to be unconstitutional, the question is now whether the governor and the Legislature can address the court’s concerns and complete what SB 632 started. Hopefully, that will happen. With the possibility of significant advantages, Oklahoma could benefit from the implementation of business courts. ABOUT THE AUTHORS Gary W. Derrick is a partner in the Oklahoma City law firm of Derrick & Briggs LLP. He received a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1976 from OSU and a J.D. in 1979 from the OU College of Law. Cecilee G. Van Horn is an associate in the Oklahoma City law firm of Hartzog Conger Cason LLP. She received a Bachelor of Arts degree in 2021 from OU and a J.D. in 2024 from the OCU School of Law. Statements or opinions expressed in the Oklahoma Bar Journal are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Oklahoma Bar Association, its officers, Board of Governors, Board of Editors or staff. With the possibility of significant advantages, Oklahoma could benefit from the implementation of business courts.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTk3MQ==