How this document has been cited
—judges may be assigned the duty of compiling and annotating statutes, in addition to their judicial functions.
- in The Administrative Law of Oklahoma and one similar citation
A petitioner for extraordinary relief bears the burden to raise those facts necessary to support the petitioner's request for relief.
- in Powers v. District Court of Tulsa County, 2009 and one similar citation
—whereby certain Justices of the Supreme Court were authorized to make a compilation of procedural statutes, with annotations, for which they were paid an additional compensation during their term of office.
- in Hunt v. Logan, 1964 and one similar citation
—one of the respondents' defenses to the writ was based upon an alleged absence of a required publication, and in rejecting the argument the Court noted that the relevant legal principle "can be applied only when proof is made that no such publication occurred
- in Powers v. District Court of Tulsa County, 2009 and one similar citation
—decided by a Court composed of Special Justices, three of the regular Justices of this Court were seeking mandamus compelling State Auditor and State Treasurer to pay their claims for extra compensation for the performance of certain additional duties assigned them by the Legislature, to be performed or not at their option.
- in Hunt v. Logan, 1964 and one similar citation
—tive and Judicial. Administrative authority or duty may by statute be appropriately made subject to the powers of either of the three departments when no provision of the constitution is thereby violated, for practically all the powers of government are executed or enforced through administrative or ministerial officers, agents, or employees. "
- in Statutes and Statutory Construction: Including a Discussion of Legislative … and one similar citation
Referring to House Bill 239, Session Laws 1936-37, c. 21, Art. 1, page 33, the opinion of the Court in that case
- in Hunt v. Logan, 1964
We said that it is not within the province of the judiciary to question the wisdom or motives of a lawmaking body in the enactment of a statute, and the same cannot be taken into consideration in determining its constitutionality.
A statute will not be held unconstitutional, unless its violation of the fundamental law is clear and palpable.
- in Adams v. Fry, 1951
—we considered the argument that the plaintiffs were receiving less in salary than their associates and that the compensation provided for in the Act would result in their receiving the same compensation as their associates, noting that the same argument was made in many of the cases announcing the rule.
Cited by
971 P. 2d 868 - Okla: Supreme Court 1998
390 P. 2d 918 - Okla: Supreme Court 1964
595 P. 2d 1334 - Okla: Supreme Court 1979
441 P. 2d 981 - Okla: Supreme Court 1968
441 P. 2d 986 - Okla: Supreme Court 1965
227 P. 3d 1060 - Okla: Supreme Court 2009
[CITATION] Statutes and statutory construction
NJ Singer - (No Title), 2000
986 P. 2d 1130 - Okla: Supreme Court 1999
HW Fleming Jr - Okla. L. Rev., 1976
[CITATION] Race Relations Law Reporter
Vanderbilt University. School of Law - 1966