Dispositions Other Than By Published Opinion | July 24, 2024

July 17, 2024

Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals

Division I

121,077 – Stein Ancillary Services, LLC, as Arkansas limited liability company, Plaintiff/Judgment Creditor/Appellant, v. Sulpher Manor, Inc., d/b/a Callaway Nursing Home, Defendant/Judgment Debtor/Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Murray County, Oklahoma. Honorable Wallace Coppedge, Trial Judge. Plaintiff/Judgment Creditor/Appellant, Stein Ancillary Services, LLC, appeals from the trial court’s journal entry vacating Plaintiff’s domesticated foreign judgment against Defendant/Judgment Debtor/Appellee, Sulphur Manor, Inc. Plaintiff obtained an Arkansas judgment against Defendant June 2016. The judgment was domesticated in Murray County, Oklahoma July 2016, and the judgment was renewed June 2021. On October 5, 2022, more than five (5) years after the Arkansas judgment was domesticated, Defendant filed a motion to vacate the domesticated judgment. Defendant argued the Arkansas judgment was facially void because the Arkansas judgment violated Defendant’s due process rights as follows: Defendant was unrepresented by counsel and was not provided with notice that the Arkansas court was going to rule on Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment; the Arkansas court violated Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure when it failed to follow the rule on withdrawal of counsel; and the Arkansas court clerk omitted Defendant’s agent from the certificate of service in the court’s order granting the motion for summary judgment. We find the Arkansas court had subject matter and personal jurisdiction over Defendant; Defendant had actual notice of the summary judgment proceeding; Defendant was not diligent in defending itself in the litigation and in obtaining legal counsel; Defendant was afforded due process of law; and the Arkansas court judgment is not void. We therefore conclude the Oklahoma district court abused its discretion when it vacated the Arkansas judgment and reverse and remand for further proceedings. Opinion by BELL, V.C.J.; SWINTON, P.J., and PRINCE, J., CONCUR. July 17, 2024

121,549 – Taylor Beth Ellis, Petitioner/Appellee, v. Samuel Preston Harbison, Defendant/Appellant. Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Honorable Loretta Radford, Trial Judge. Defendant/Appellant, Samuel Preston Harbison, appeals an Order that granted a victim’s protective order. Mr. Harbison asserts on appeal that the trial court allowed improper testimony at the hearing on the request for a protective order. He claims that the Petitioner/Appellee, Taylor Beth Ellis, should not have been allowed to testify as to what Mr. Ellis meant by the words “special skill” that were included in an email he wrote. We have reviewed the record and find that the trial court did not commit error when it allowed Ms. Ellis to testify regarding the meaning of the email. The Order of Protection entered by the trial court is AFFIRMED. Opinion by PRINCE, J.; BELL, V.C.J., and SWINTON, P.J. CONCUR. July 17, 2024

Division II

120,526 – SACC Investments-Moyer 110, LLC, an Oklahoma Limited Liability Company, Plaintiff/Appellant, vs. City of Edmond, an Oklahoma Municipal Corporation; and The Edmond Planning Commission, a duly constituted and appointed body of the City of Edmond, Defendants/Appellees, Brian Amy, Staci Amy, Andy Donehue, Kindall Donehue, Rich Goranson, Lisa Goranson, Richard Kanaly, Kristi Parker, Vince Parker, Shawn Smith, Jill Smith, Derek Smithee and Laura Smithee, Intervenors/Appellees. Appeal from Order of the District Court of Oklahoma County, Hon. Richard Ogden, Trial Judge. Appellant SACC Investments-Moyer 110, LLC (Company) appeals the judgment of the district court finding that the Edmond Planning Commission did not act in an arbitrary or capricious manner or rely on arbitrary standards when it denied Company’s preliminary plat application. The district court’s judgment is not clearly contrary to the weight of the evidence. We affirm the judgment of the district court and its denial of Company’s request to enjoin the City of Edmond from enforcing the Commission’s denial. AFFIRMED. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division II by FISCHER, J.; BARNES, C.J., and WISEMAN, P.J., concur. July 17, 2024

Division III

121,163 – In the Matter of A.T., Alleged Deprived Child, Jasmine Harring, Appellant, v. State of Oklahoma, Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Honorable Julie Doss, Trial Judge. Mother, Jasmine Harring, seeks review of the Tulsa County District Court’s order, after jury trial, terminating Harring’s parental rights to A.T. The Tulsa County District Court Order upon the jury’s verdict terminating Mother’s parental rights, filed December 12, 2022, is AFFIRMED. Opinion by GOREE, J.; DOWNING, J., concurs, and MITCHELL, P.J., concurs in result. July 22, 2024

121,353 – Bruce Morris, Plaintiff/Appellee, v. Daniel E. Harwick, Defendant/Appellant. Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Honorable Ann Keele, Trial Judge. Appellant, Daniel E. Harwick, appeals from the trial court’s Order Denying Motion to Vacate a protective order that was granted approximately two years earlier in favor of Appellee, Bruce Morris. A review of the record shows the findings of fact of the trial court are supported by sufficient competent evidence and the trial court’s conclusions of law adequately explain the decision. Therefore, we summarily AFFIRM the trial court’s judgment pursuant to Oklahoma Supreme Court Rule 1.202(b), (d) and (e), 12 O.S.2021, Ch. 15, App. 1. Opinion by DOWNING, J.; MITCHELL, P.J., concurs and GOREE, J., concurs specially. July 22, 2024

121,487 – BancFirst, Plaintiff/Appellee, v. Dustin D. Fravel, Christina L. Fravel, and State of Oklahoma, ex rel, Oklahoma Tax Commission, Defendants/Appellants. Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Honorable William D. LaFortune, Trial Judge. Appellant, Christina Fravel (Fravel), appeals the trial court’s confirmation of a sheriff’s sale involving a property that was foreclosed in March of 2020. Appellee, BancFirst, initiated foreclosure proceedings in September of 2019. The property sold at a sheriff’s sale in July of 2020 and since that date BancFirst has sought confirmation of the sale. After a stay and various court proceedings, the trial court, on June 28, 2023, issued an order confirming the sheriff’s sale. It is from this order that Fravel appeals. After a thorough review of the record, we AFFIRM. Opinion by DOWNING, J.; GOREE, J., and MITCHELL, P.J., concur. July 22, 2024

121,807 – In re the Estate of Larry O. Parks, Deceased, Carolyn S. Parks, Appellant, v. Rebecca V. Parks, Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Honorable Kurt G. Glassco, Trial Judge. Appellant Carolyn Parks (Carolyn) appeals from the trial court’s November 28, 2023 Order Appointing Personal Representative, Determining Heirs, and Issuing Letters of Administration (Order) and the Letters of Administration appointing a third-party to serve as Personal Representative of the Estate of Larry O. Parks (Larry). After review of the record and applicable law, we AFFIRM. Opinion by DOWNING, J.; MITCHELL, P.J., concurs, and GOREE, J., concurs in part and dissents in part. July 22, 2024

122,131 – Dawnell Schrum, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. Saint Francis Hospital, Inc., Defendant/Appellee, and Warren Clinic, Inc. and Saint Francis Hospital Muskogee, Inc., Defendants. Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Honorable Caroline Wall, Trial Judge. Appellant, Dawnell Schrum, (Schrum), brings this appeal from the trial court’s summary judgment in favor of Appellee, Saint Francis Hospital, Inc. (Hospital). Hospital filed a Motion for Involuntary Dismissal of Appeal pursuant to Okla. Sup. Ct. R. 1.6(c), 12 O.S.2021, Ch. 15, App. 1. Schrum timely filed a Response. We are persuaded by Hospital and find the appeal to be premature and DISMISS. Opinion by DOWNING, J.; MITCHELL, P.J., concurs, and GOREE, J., dissents. July 22, 2024

Division IV

121,415 – In re the Marriage of Trent David Daniel, Petitioner/Appellee, vs. Felicia Rae Ann Daniel, now Renegar, Respondent/Appellant. Appeal from the District Court of Bryan County, Hon. Mark Campbell, Trial Judge. Felicia Rae Ann Daniel, now Renegar (Mother) appeals the trial court’s June 5, 2023 journal entry granting Trent David Daniel’s (Father) motion to modify, seeking sole custody of their minor child, S.D. For the above reasons, we affirm the journal entry. AFFIRMED. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV, by HIXON, J.; HUBER, P.J., and BLACKWELL, J., concur. July 17, 2024

120,348 – In the Matter of the Guardianship of M.K., a minor child: Robin McClure and Denise McClure, Petitioners/Appellees, vs. Jonathan Kubilis, Respondent/Appellant. Appeal from Order of the District Court of Canadian County, Hon. Bob W. Hughey, Trial Judge. Jonathan Kubilis (Father), appeals from the trial court’s order granting maternal grandparents Robin McClure and Denise McClure (Grandfather and Grandmother or collectively Grandparents) grandparental visitation with his minor daughter, HK. Father claims that the trial court abused its discretion in granting visitation because Grandparents did not satisfy the requirements of 43 O.S.2021 § 109.4(A)(1), the trial court failed to consider the child’s preference that visitation not occur, and visitation was not in the best interests of the child. We conclude that Father has failed to show that the trial court abused its discretion or otherwise erred in its decision to grant Grandparents’ petition for visitation and affirm. AFFIRMED. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division II, by FISCHER, J.; BARNES, C.J., and WISEMAN, P.J., concur. July 19, 2024

120,899 (Consolidated with Case No. 121,104) – Richard Dale Thornton, Jr., and Rick Thornton Properties, LLC, Plaintiffs/Appellants, vs. Dephanie Dawn Thornton and Bailey Paige Thornton, Defendants/Appellees. Appeal from the District Court of Cleveland County, Hon. Jeff Virgin, Trial Judge. Rick Thornton and Rick Thornton Properties, LLC (“RTP” or collectively, “Plaintiffs”) appeal the trial court’s entry of judgment quieting title to certain real property in favor of his and Dephanie Thornton’s daughter, Bailey Thornton. While the appeal was pending, the trial court granted Plaintiffs’ motion to vacate. Bailey and Dephanie (“Defendants”) thereafter appealed the trial court’s order granting the motion to vacate. The Supreme Court consolidated the appeals for our review. The primary issue before the Court involves certain real property acquired by Rick and Dephanie during their marriage that was omitted from their Texas divorce decree, which Dephanie later deeded to Bailey. Upon review, we affirm the trial court’s order vacating judgment in favor of Bailey on Rick’s quiet title claim but reverse the court’s vacatur of an injunction in Bailey’s favor pending resolution of the underlying action. We remand for further proceedings consistent with our Opinion. AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV, by HIXON, J.; HUBER, P.J., concurs, and BLACKWELL, J., concurs in part and dissents in part. July 19, 2024

Posted in Dispositions Other Than By Published Opinion and tagged Dispositions, Dispositions Other Than By Published Opinions, Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals