DOCSLIB.ORG

Court Issue Makes the Perfect Holiday Gift

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Court Issue Makes the Perfect Holiday Gift Volume 89 — No. 33 — 12/8/2018 Court Issue makes the perfect holiday gift CLE by the Sea 2019 Honolulu, Hawai‘i - February 11-15, 2019 Alaska Bar Association · Colorado Bar Association CLE · FLORIDA BAR ASSOCIATION · State Bar of Georgia Hawai’i State Bar Association · IDAHO BAR ASSOCIATION · Internet for Lawyers · Kansas Bar Association Maine State Bar Association · MARYLAND BAR ASSOCIATION · State Bar of Montana · Oklahoma Bar Association OREGON BAR ASSOCIATION · South Carolina Bar · TENNESSEE BAR ASSOCIATION · WASHINGTON BAR ASSOCIATION · Wyoming State Bar Attendees will find the CLE programming schedule and events ideal for learning and relaxation. HOTEL INFORMATION: Prince Waikiki, 100 Holomoana Street Honolulu, Hawaii 96815 Reservations: (800) 321-6248 Oklahoma: 14.5 hours including 10 hours of ethics (based on a 50-minute credit hour). TUITION: $495 CLE Registration Fee. $550 after January 10, 2019 For details and to register go to: www.AlaskaBar.org/2019CLEbytheSea Stay up-to-date and follow us on 1590 The Oklahoma Bar Journal Vol. 89 — No. 33 — 12/8/2018 THE OKLAHOMA BAR JOURNAL is a publication of the Oklahoma Bar Associa- tion. All rights reserved. Copyright© 2018 Oklahoma Bar Association. Statements or opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Oklahoma Bar Association, its officers, Volume 89 – No. 33 – 12/8/2018 Board of Governors, Board of Editors or staff. Although advertising copy is reviewed, no endorsement of any product or service JOURNAL STAFF BOARD OF EDITORS offered by any advertisement is intended or JOHN MORRIS WILLIAMS MELISSA DELACERDA implied by publication. Advertisers are solely responsible for the content of their ads, and Editor-in-Chief Stillwater, Chair the OBA reserves the right to edit or reject [email protected] LUKE ADAMS, Clinton any advertising copy for any reason. CAROL A. MANNING, Editor CLAYTON BAKER, Vinita Legal articles carried in THE OKLAHOMA [email protected] BAR JOURNAL are selected by the Board of AARON BUNDY, Tulsa Editors. Information about submissions can MACKENZIE SCHEER PATRICIA A. FLANAGAN be found at www.okbar.org. Advertising Manager Yukon [email protected] BAR CENTER StaFF AMANDA GRANT, Spiro LACEY PLAUDIS John Morris Williams, Executive Director; Gina Communications Specialist C. SCOTT JONES, L. Hendryx, General Counsel; Joe Balkenbush, Oklahoma City Ethics Counsel; Jim Calloway, Director of Man- [email protected] agement Assistance Program; Craig D. Combs, ERIN MEANS DEWALT, Moore LAURA STONE Director of Administration; Susan Damron, Communications Specialist SHANNON L. PRESCOTT Director of Educational Programs; Beverly Petry Lewis, Administrator MCLE Commission; Carol [email protected] Okmulgee A. Manning, Director of Communications; Rob- LESLIE TAYLOR, Ada bin Watson, Director of Information Technology; Loraine Dillinder Farabow, Peter Haddock, Tracy Pierce Nester, Katherine Ogden, Steve Sullins, Assistant General Counsels OFFICERS & BOARD OF GOVERNORS Les Arnold, Julie A. Bays, Gary Berger, Debbie Brink, Melody Claridge, Cheryl Corey, KIMBERLY HAYS, President, Tulsa; Ben Douglas, Dieadra Florence, Johnny RICHARD STEVENS, Vice President, Norman; CHARLES Marie Floyd, Matt Gayle, Suzi Hendrix, W. CHESNUT, President-Elect, Miami; LINDA S. THOMAS, Debra Jenkins, Rhonda Langley, Jamie Lane, Durrel Lattimore, Renee Montgomery, Immediate Past President, Bartlesville; MATTHEW C. BEESE, Whitney Mosby, Lacey Plaudis, Tracy Muskogee; JOHN W. COYLE III, Oklahoma City; MARK E. Sanders, Mackenzie Scheer, Mark FIELDS, McAlester; KALEB K. HENNIGH, Enid; BRIAN T. Schneidewent, Laura Stone, Margaret Travis, HERMANSON, Ponca City; JAMES R. HICKS, Tulsa; ALISSA Krystal Willis, Laura Willis, Jennifer Wynne HUTTER, Norman; JAMES L. KEE, Duncan; BRIAN K. MOR- & Roberta Yarbrough TON, Oklahoma City; JIMMY D. OLIVER, Stillwater; BRYON J. Oklahoma Bar Association 405-416-7000 WILL, Yukon; D. KENYON WILLIAMS JR., Tulsa; NATHAN D. Toll Free 800-522-8065 RICHTER, Mustang, Chairperson, OBA Young Lawyers Division FAX 405-416-7001 Continuing Legal Education 405-416-7029 The Oklahoma Bar Journal (ISSN 0030-1655) is published three Ethics Counsel 405-416-7055 times a month in January, February, March, April, May, August, General Counsel 405-416-7007 September, October November and December and bimonthly in Lawyers Helping Lawyers 800-364-7886 June and July by the Oklahoma Bar Association, 1901 N. Lincoln Mgmt. Assistance Program 405-416-7008 Boulevard, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73105. Periodicals postage Mandatory CLE 405-416-7009 paid at St. Joseph, Michigan. Board of Bar Examiners 405-416-7075 Subscriptions $60 per year except for law students registered with Oklahoma Bar Foundation 405-416-7070 the OBA and senior members who may subscribe for $30; all active members included in dues. Single copies: $3 Postmaster Send address changes to the Oklahoma Bar Association, www.okbar.org P.O. Box 53036, Oklahoma City, OK 73152-3036. Vol. 89 — No. 33 — 12/8/2018 The Oklahoma Bar Journal 1591 CONQUER YOUR M O U NTAI N BURNOUT DEPRESSION ANXIETY SUBSTANCE ABUSE RELATIONSHIP CHALLENGES LAWYERS HELPING LAWYERS ASSISTANCE PROGRAM free 24-HOUR CONFIDENTIAL ASSISTAN CE 800.364.7886 WWW.OKBAR.ORG/LHL 1592 The Oklahoma Bar Journal Vol. 89 — No. 33 — 12/8/2018 OKLAHOMA BAR ASSOCIATION table of contents Dec. 8, 2018 • Vol. 89 • No. 33 page 1594 Index to Court Opinions 1595 Opinions of Supreme Court 1616 Opinions of Court of Criminal Appeals 1634 Calendar of Events 1636 Opinions of Court of Civil Appeals 1656 Disposition of Cases Other Than by Publication Vol. 89 — No. 33 — 12/8/2018 The Oklahoma Bar Journal 1593 Index to Opinions of Supreme Court 2018 OK 86 In re: Amendment of Rule Seven of the Rules Governing Admission to the Practice of Law, 5 O.S. Supp. 2018, Ch.1, app 5 SCBD-6707 ...................................................... 1549 2018 OK 87 In re: Amendment of Rule Eleven of the Rules Governing Admission to the Practice of Law, 5 O.S. Supp. 2018, Ch. 1, app. 5 SCBD-6708 .................................................... 1550 2018 OK 90 JERED BARRIOS, as the Personal Representative of the ESTATE OF RAN- DALL BARRIOS, deceased, Plaintiff, v. HASKELL COUNTY PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHORITY; BRIAN HALE, individually; KATRINA CHRISTY, individually and in her official capacity; SHERIFF TIM TURNER, in his official capacity; and DOES I through V, Defendants. KELLY L. FOUTCH, administrator of the ESTATE OF RUS- SELL TED FOUTCH, deceased, Plaintiff, v. TURN KEY HEALTH, LLC, d/b/a TURN KEY MEDICAL and TURN KEY; CREEK COUNTY PUBLIC FACILITIES AUTHOR- ITY; JANE DOE NURSE I; JANE DOE NURSE II; and JOHN/JANE DOES III-X, Defendants. Case No. 117,103 (Comp. w/ 117,107 (Cons. w/ 117,154)) .................................. 1597 2018 OK 91 JON CHRISTIAN, Petitioner-Appellee, v. DAISY CHRISTIAN, Respondent- Appellant. Case No. 115,474 ............................................................................................................ 1605 2018 OK 92 STATE OF OKLAHOMA ex rel. OKLAHOMA BAR ASSOCIATION Com- plainant, v. STEVEN PAUL MINKS Respondent. SCBD #6644 ................................................. 1607 2018 OK 93 IN THE MATTER OF C.M., E.M., and R.M., Children Under 18 Years of Age, NORMA MARTINEZ-MENDOZA, Appellant, v. STATE OF OKLAHOMA, Appellee. No. 116,494 ......................................................................................................................................... 1608 Index to Opinions of Court of Criminal Appeals 2018 OK CR 36 G.W., Appellant, v. THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA, Appellee. No. J-2018- 511 ........................................................................................................................................................ 1616 2018 OK CR 37 HOWARD SHELTON MASON, JR., Appellant, v. THE STATE OF OKLA- HOMA, Appellee Case No. F-2017-650 ......................................................................................... 1620 2018 OK CR 38 PHILLIP ERIC WINBUSH, III, Appellant, -vs- THE STATE OF OKLA- HOMA, Appellee. No. RE-2016-995 ............................................................................................... 1628 Index to Opinions of Court of Civil Appeals 2018 OK CIV APP 68 IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF GREGORY ROBERT JONES AND SAMANTHA LYNN WHITE: GREGORY ROBERT JONES, Petitioner/Appellee, vs. SAMANTHA LYNNE WHITE, Respondent/Appellant. Case No. 115,481 ............................ 1636 2018 OK CIV APP 69 SOUTHWEST ORTHOPAEDIC SPECIALISTS, P.L.L.C., a domestic professional limited liability company, Plaintiff/Appellee, vs. IRA WAYNE ALLI- SON, an individual; and ALLISON LEGAL, PLLC, a domestic professional limited liability company, Defendants/Appellants. Case No. 116,348 ................................................... 1645 2018 OK CIV APP 70 MARK WEATHERS, Petitioner/Appellee, vs. THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA ex rel. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, Respondent/Appellant. Case No. 116,995 ................................................................................................................................ 1653 1594 The Oklahoma Bar Journal Vol. 89 — No. 33 — 12/8/2018 Opinions of Supreme Court Manner and Form of Opinions in the Appellate Courts; See Rule 1.200, Rules — Okla. Sup. Ct. R., 12 O.S. Supp. 1996 (1997 T. 12 Special Supplement) 2018 OK 86 FEBRUARY BAR EXAM In re: Amendment of Rule Seven of the Application filed on or before: Rules Governing Admission to the Practice of Law, 5 O.S. Supp. 2018, Ch.1, app 5 1 September ........$1,000 1,100 SCBD-6707. November 13, 2018 1 October
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Oklahoma Statutes Title 12. Civil Procedure
    OKLAHOMA STATUTES TITLE 12. CIVIL PROCEDURE §12-1. Title of chapter...........................................................................................................................30 §12-2. Force of common law.................................................................................................................30 §12-3. Repealed by Laws 1984, c. 164, § 32, eff. Nov. 1, 1984.............................................................30 §12-4. Repealed by Laws 1984, c. 164, § 32, eff. Nov. 1, 1984.............................................................30 §12-5. Repealed by Laws 1984, c. 164, § 32, eff. Nov. 1, 1984.............................................................30 §12-6. Repealed by Laws 1984, c. 164, § 32, eff. Nov. 1, 1984.............................................................30 §12-7. Repealed by Laws 1984, c. 164, § 32, eff. Nov. 1, 1984.............................................................30 §12-8. Repealed by Laws 1984, c. 164, § 32, eff. Nov. 1, 1984.............................................................30 §12-9. Repealed by Laws 1984, c. 164, § 32, eff. Nov. 1, 1984.............................................................31 §12-10. Repealed by Laws 1984, c. 164, § 32, eff. Nov. 1, 1984...........................................................31 §12-11. Repealed by Laws 1984, c. 164, § 32, eff. Nov. 1, 1984...........................................................31 §12-12. Repealed by Laws 1984, c. 164, § 32, eff. Nov. 1, 1984...........................................................31
    [Show full text]
  • State Ownership of Beds of Inland Waters—A Summary and Reexamination Peter N
    Nebraska Law Review Volume 57 | Issue 3 Article 4 1978 State Ownership of Beds of Inland Waters—A Summary and Reexamination Peter N. Davis University of Missouri School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr Recommended Citation Peter N. Davis, State Ownership of Beds of Inland Waters—A Summary and Reexamination, 57 Neb. L. Rev. 665 (1978) Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol57/iss3/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law, College of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Nebraska Law Review by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. By Peter N. Davis* State Ownership of Beds of Inland Waters-A Summary and Reexamination I. INTRODUCTION States rely on state ownership of the beds of streams, rivers, and lakes for various regulatory and proprietary purposes. These include licensing of bed use, leasing of underlying miner- al rights, protection of public use rights, assertion of public trust powers, and location of boundaries of abutting privately-owned land. The extent of this state ownership in states created from federal territories is determined by a conjunction of the follow- ing: (1) the "equal footing rule," (2) the law of federal land patent interpretation, (3) state rules on incidents to title to abutting uplands, (4) federal and state definitions of navigability, and (5) the law of implied grants of land from the sovereign. States have asserted title to the beds of many streams, rivers, and lakes by assuming the correctness of certain interpretations of these rules of law.
    [Show full text]
  • Commissioner Richard B. Long Chair, UUDDA/UUDA Drafting Committee
    Memo to: Commissioner Richard B. Long Chair, UUDDA/UUDA Drafting Committee From: Joe Colquitt Reporter Date: September 24, 2015 Apart from a few routine tweaks, at the close of our meeting there were three issues to be addressed. I have spent considerable time researching, reading and deciding how to address the issues raised. Here are my suggestions: ISSUE 1: Question: How can a statute overrule a constitutional provision? That is a good question with an easy answer. It cannot. Thus, as explained below, I have tweaked the language in § 2(2) and left § 4(a) intact. Why the question? Section 2(2) defines “law” to include “the federal or a state constitution, a federal or state statute, a judicial decision or order, a rule of court, an executive order, and an administrative rule, regulation, or order.” Section 4(a) states that with limited exceptions, “if a law of this state requires or permits use of a sworn declaration, an unsworn declaration meeting the requirements of this [act] has the same effect as a sworn declaration.” Assume the enacting state’s constitution required all declarations used in adoption proceedings be under oath or sworn (any law to the contrary notwithstanding). Applying Section 4(a), the “law [i.e., “state constitution” – § 2(2)] of the state requires use of a sworn declaration,” yet 4(a) establishes that an unsworn declaration “has the same effect as a sworn declaration.” Ergo, the [act] trumps the state constitutional provision. But, of course, it cannot; thus, the provision is defective and declarations for adoption proceedings would need to be under oath as required by the state constitutional mandate.
    [Show full text]
  • ONG VUE, Petitioner
    No. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES ONG VUE, Petitioner V. FRANK X. HENKE, Oklahoma Board of Corrections Member; ERNEST E. HAYNES, Oklahoma Board of Corrections Member; MICHAEL W. ROACH, Oklahoma Board of Corrections Member; DIANNE B. OWENS, Oklahoma Board of Corrections Member; ADAM LUCK, Oklahoma Board of Corrections Member; JOHN HOLDER, Oklahoma Board of Corrections Member; KEVIN J. GROSS, Oklahoma Board of Corrections Member; DELYNN FUDGE, Executive Director, Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board; THOMAS GILLERT, Chairperson of the Pardon and Parole Board; ROBERT MACY, Pardon and Parole Board Member; C. ALLEN McCALL, Pardon and Parole Board Member; MICHAEL STEELE, Pardon and Parole Board Member; ROBERTA FULLERTON, Pardon and Parole Board Member; MELISSA L. BLANTON, Pardon and Parole Staff Attorney Respondents On 'Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI Ong Vue DOC#26488 1 Pro se Litigant Dick Conner Correctional Center 129 Conner Road Hominy, Oklahoma 74035 QUESTIONS PRESENTED Whether the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that Petitioner Vue "failed to state a claim" is in contrary to the holding of Wilkinson v. Dotson, 544 U.S. 74 (2005), where Petitioner Vue, under 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983, challenges the constitutionality of the Oklahoma state parole procedures on constitutional and statutory grounds. Whether Petitioner Vue's 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 claim on the crucial distinction between I judicial review of substantive agency decisions and judicial review of the agency's compliance with the substantive requirements of Oklahoma Statutes title 57, § 332.7 (Supp.
    [Show full text]
  • 215227952.Pdf
    THE UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA GRADUATE COLLEGE SELECTED ASPECTS OF THE LEGAL STATUS OF THE STUDENT PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATOR IN THE PUBLIC JUNIOR COLLEGE OF OKLAHOMA A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE FACULTY in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION BY RAYMOND E*"CLEVELAND NORMAN, OKLAHOMA 1967 SELECTED ASPECTS OF THE LEGAL STATUS OF THE STUDENT PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATOR IN THE PUBLIC JUNIOR COLLEGE OF OKLAHOMA APPROVED BY ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The writer would like to take this opportunity to express his appreciation to the many individuals who rendered assistance in this undertaking. In particular my gratitude ta Dr. Herbert R. Hengst as Major Professor and Committee Chairman for his patient and helpful guidance in the preparation of this report. Also to the other mem­ bers of the committee: Dr. James G. Harlow, Dr. Robert E. Ohm, and Dr. Joseph E. Pray. In addition, a vote of thanks to Dr. Freeman McKee, President of Murray State College and to Joan Kimbrough, Secretary to the Deans, for giving so generously of their time and assistance in this study. And to my wife. Ginger, sons, Mark, John, Greg, and Jeff, and to daughter, Val, to whom this effort is dedicated for their steadfast encouragement and moral support. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWI£DGEMENTS ............................... ill Chapter I. INTRODUCTION ................................. 1 The Concept of Discipline, Back­ ground and P u r p o s e ........... ...... 1 Statement of Problem............... 13 Delimitation of the Study......... 14 Definition of Terms................. 15 P r o c e d u r e ......................... 15 S u m m a r y ....................
    [Show full text]
  • IN the IOWA SUPREME COURT No. 18-1280
    IN THE IOWA SUPREME COURT No. 18-1280 ______________________________________________________________ JOSHUA VENCKUS, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CITY OF IOWA CITY; ANDREW RICH; JOHNSON COUNTY, IOWA; ANNE LAHEY; NAEDA ELLIOTT; and DANA CHRISTIANSEN, Defendants-Appellants. ______________________________________________________________ APPEAL FROM THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR JOHNSON COUNTY THE HONORABLE CHAD KEPROS, JUDGE ______________________________________________________________ FINAL BRIEF OF DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS CITY OF IOWA CITY AND ANDREW RICH ______________________________________________________________ Eric Goers Susan Dulek Assistant City Attorneys 410 East Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 (319) 356-5030 [email protected] ATTORNEYS FOR CITY OF IOWA CITY AND ANDREW RICH ELECTRONICALLY FILED JAN 16, 2019 CLERK OF SUPREME COURT TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES .................................................................................. 5 ROUTING STATEMENT .................................................................................... 17 STATEMENT OF THE CASE ............................................................................. 17 STATEMENT OF THE FACTS .......................................................................... 20 ARGUMENT ........................................................................................................ 22 I. THE DISTRICT COURT ERRED BY FAILING TO DISMISS VENCKUS’S MALICIOUS PROSECUTION CLAIM BECAUSE THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE CHARGE AGAINST HIM WAS SUPPORTED
    [Show full text]
  • Probate Estates In
    PROBATE ESTATES IN: TEXAS OKLAHOMA LOUISIANA OKLAHOMA CITY ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONAL LANDMEN Oklahoma City, Oklahoma October 4, 2004 George A. Snell, III Attorney at Law Herring Bank Building 2201 Civic Circle, Suite 508 Amarillo, TX 79109 (806) 359-8611 (806) 359-1274 FAX [email protected] Timothy C. Dowd Richard W. Revels, Jr. Elias, Books, Brown, Peterson & Massad Liskow & Lewis 211 North Robinson, Suite 1300 822 Harding Street Oklahoma City, OK 73102-7114 P. O. Box 52008 (405) 235-1551 Lafayette, LA 70505-2008 (405) 235-1572 FAX (337) 232-7424 [email protected] (337) 267-2399 FAX [email protected] Copyright © 1996 by George A. Snell, III, Timothy C. Dowd and Richard W. Revels, Jr. INTRODUCTION The authors attempt herein to summarize the estate procedures of Texas, Oklahoma and Louisiana, and to point out the significant differences between said procedures. DISCLAIMER The purpose of this article is to provide general principles of probate procedure and its impact upon the mineral estate. All of the subjects discussed herein could be and likely have been discussed in much greater detail in other articles or legal treatises. This article is intended only to provide these principles in a summary form so that a division order analyst may review these principles prior to interpreting instruments that may or may not convey a mineral or royalty interest. This article is not intended to give specific legal advice! While the authors have sought to draw together statutory and case law from numerous jurisdictions, the law is subject to many exceptions or variations from general principles, depending on the precise fact situation.
    [Show full text]
  • British Statutes in American Jurisdictions 197
    December, 1929 BRITISH STATUITES IN AMERICAN JURISDICTIONS FREDERICKI G. MCKEAN, JR. The abstraction called the Law is a magic mirror wherein we see reflected not only our own lives, but the lives of all men that have been.-Attributed to Mr. Jus- tice Holmes. It has been said that man differs from other animals chiefly in this: that he retains in each generation that which has been handed down by its predecessor,, and, after applying the touchstone of experience, passes it to his successors. This commonplace has been phrased in the folk saying, "Experience is the best teacher", and in the legal aphorism that "the life of the law has been-experi- ence". An outstanding characteristic of the founding of this re- public was the tenacity with which our forefathers clung to their inheritance of the laws which their immigrant ancestors brought into the New World and adapted to the requirements of changed environment. John Adams is credited with the statement that he would not have taken the stand that he did in the War for Inde- pendence, if such action had involved the loss of the common law. Chief Justice Taft says, "We embodied in the Bill of Rights in our Constitution the principles of the British Constitution as they had. been established at the Common Law."' At the threshold of the Revolution the American Continental Congress of 1774, under the presidency of George Washington, adopted this resolution: "Resolved, N. C. D. 5. That the respective colonies are entitled to the common law of England, and more espe- cially to the great and inestimable privilege of being tried by their peers of the vicinage, according to the course of that law.
    [Show full text]
  • New Trends in Conflicts Rules Affecting Torts: a Chronological Review Richard V
    Loyola University Chicago Law Journal Volume 1 Article 2 Issue 2 Spring 1970 1970 New Trends in Conflicts Rules Affecting Torts: A Chronological Review Richard V. Carpenter Prof. of Law, Hastings University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: http://lawecommons.luc.edu/luclj Part of the Conflict of Laws Commons Recommended Citation Richard V. Carpenter, New Trends in Conflicts Rules Affecting Torts: A Chronological Review, 1 Loy. U. Chi. L. J. 187 (1970). Available at: http://lawecommons.luc.edu/luclj/vol1/iss2/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by LAW eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola University Chicago Law Journal by an authorized administrator of LAW eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. LOYOLA UNIVERSITY LAW JOURNAL Volume 1, Number 2, Summer 1970 New Trends in Conflicts Rules Affecting Torts: A Chronological Review Richaid V. Carpenter* Around the turn of the century a Texas switchman named Slater was killed in Mexico due to the negligence of his employer, a Colorado corporation which operated a railroad from Texas to Mexico City. The switchman's widow and children, all citizens and residents of Texas, brought a diversity action in the federal court in Texas against the railroad for damages. On appeal, the Supreme Court, in Slater v. Mexican National R.R. Co.,' held that the Mexican remedy, support and pensions during necessity or until marriage, was beyond the power of the Federal courts to grant. The trial court attempted to substitute a common law remedy in the form of lump sum damages based on a jury verdict but on appeal the judgment was reversed and the action ordered dismissed.
    [Show full text]
  • Election Contests
    CHAPTER 9 Election Contests A. In General § 1. Constitutional Provisions; Historical Background § 2. Contested Election Laws § 3. State or Local Election Boards B. Jurisdiction and Powers § 4. The House § 5. Election Committees § 6. The Clerk; Transmittal of Papers § 7. The Courts C. Grounds of Contest § 8. Generally § 9. Faulty Credentials; Citizenship § 10. Violation of Federal or State Election Laws § 11. Improper Attempts to Influence or Confuse Voters § 12. Voting Booth and Balloting Irregularities D. Defenses § 13. Generally § 14. Contestant’s Credentials and Qualifications § 15. Abatement § 16. Limitations and Laches E. Practice and Procedure § 17. Alternatives to Statutory Election Contests § 18. Commencing the Contest Commentary and editing by John Theodore Fee, J.D. 963 Ch. 9 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS § 19. Parties F. Notice of Contest § 20. Generally; Time § 21. Service of Notice § 22. Form and Contents of Notice G. Pleading § 23. Generally § 24. Answer § 25. Motion to Dismiss § 26. Motion for More Definite Statement H. Taking of Testimony; Depositions § 27. Generally; Time § 28. Examination of Parties and Witnesses § 29. Scope of Examination; Objections § 30. Subpenas § 31. Affidavits I. Committee Hearing and Review; Dismissal and With- drawal § 32. Generally; Preparation of Briefs § 33. Dismissal and Withdrawal of Contest J. Evidence § 34. Generally § 35. Burden of Proof § 36. Presumptions § 37. Ballots § 38. Determination of Voter Intention K. Inspection and Recount of Ballots § 39. Generally § 40. Grounds 964 ELECTION CONTESTS Ch. 9 § 41. Procedure L. Disposition of Contests; Resolutions § 42. Generally § 43. Committee Reports § 44. Form of Resolutions § 45. Costs and Expenses; Compensation and Allow- ances M. Summaries of Election Contests, 1931–72 § 46.
    [Show full text]
  • Choice of Law in the United States Gregory E
    Hastings Law Journal Volume 38 | Issue 6 Article 1 1-1987 Choice of Law in the United States Gregory E. Smith Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_law_journal Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Gregory E. Smith, Choice of Law in the United States, 38 Hastings L.J. 1041 (1987). Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_law_journal/vol38/iss6/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hastings Law Journal by an authorized editor of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. Choice of Law in the United States by GREGORY E. SMITH* Perhaps no legal subject has caused more consternation and confu- sion among the bench and bar than choice of law.1 Much of the bewil- derment is attributable to the fact that the modern choice of law era did not begin until approximately 1963.2 Since then, courts have struggled mightily to come to grips with various modern choice of law theories put forth by conflicts scholars. The decisions in any given jurisdiction are often decidedly, perhaps wildly, inconsistent. Added to this is the fact that published conflicts decisions are quite rare. Although conflicts cases arise at the trial level fairly often, many years may pass before a court of 3 last resort is called upon to resolve a difficult choice of law problem. Thus, confounded judges are left to grapple with a smattering of irrecon- cilable and sometimes incomprehensive precedents. It is no small won- der that many judges have dreaded seeing choice of law cases on their dockets.
    [Show full text]
  • Oklahoma City University Law Review
    OCULREV Vol. 41-3 Winter 2016 Burke 337--423 (Do Not Delete) 4/28/2017 2:00 PM OKLAHOMA CITY UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW VOLUME 41 WINTER 2016 NUMBER 3 ARTICLE THE EVOLUTION OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION LAW IN OKLAHOMA: IS THE GRAND BARGAIN STILL ALIVE? Bob Burke I. INTRODUCTION The concept of compensating injured workers for work-related accidents is not new. As early as 2050 B.C., the law of the city-state of Ur in the Fertile Crescent provided for payment for injuries to specific parts of the body.1 “Ancient Greek, Roman, Arab, and Chinese law” allowed a J.D., Oklahoma City University School of Law; B.A., Journalism, University of Oklahoma; Honorary Doctorate of Humane Letters, Oklahoma City University; Fellow, The College of Workers’ Compensation Lawyers; assisted in writing changes to Oklahoma workers’ compensation law, 1977 to 2011; rewrote entire Workers’ Compensation Code, 2011; member, Oklahoma Advisory Council on Workers’ Compensation, 1994 to 2011; Oklahoma Secretary of Commerce in administration of Governor David Boren; managed Boren’s first campaign for U.S. Senate, 1978; chair, Legal Committee, Fallin Commission for Workers’ Compensation Reform, 1994 to 1998; member, Oklahoma Bar Association Judicial Elections Committee, 2016; represented 16,000 injured workers since 1980. All conclusions are those of the author. 1. Gregory P. Guyton, A Brief History of Workers’ Compensation, 19 IOWA ORTHOPAEDIC J., 1999, at 106, 106 (1999). Guyton, a board-certified orthopedic surgeon, authored an excellent overview of the workers’ compensation system in the United States 337 OCULREV Vol. 41-3 Winter 2016 Burke 337--423 (Do Not Delete) 4/28/2017 2:00 PM 338 Oklahoma City University Law Review [Vol.
    [Show full text]