Dispositions Other Than By Published Opinion | Nov. 20, 2024

Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals

Division I


Division II

121,280 – William Schmidt and Barbara Reilley-Schmidt, Plaintiffs/Appellants, vs. Norman Regional Health System and Clifton Whitesell, M.D., Defendants/Appellees.  Appeal from the District Court of Cleveland County, Honorable Thad Balkman, Trial Judge.  Plaintiffs William Schmidt and Barbara Reilley-Schmidt appeal the trial court’s orders granting Defendants Norman Regional Health System’s and Clifton Whitesell, M.D.’s motions for summary judgment. Based on the record before us, we are unable to conclude that the requisite elements of supervening cause as alleged by Defendants have been established.  We conclude it was error to grant Defendants’ motions for summary judgment, and the trial court’s orders granting summary judgment are reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings.  REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division II, by WISEMAN, P.J.; BARNES, C.J., and FISCHER, J., concur. Nov. 13, 2024


120,673 – In the Marriage of: Katherine A. Ellis, Petitioner/Appellee, vs. Brandon G. Ellis, Respondent/Appellant, and Deborah Fortune and G. Gail Stricklin, Appellees.  Appeal from the District Court of Oklahoma County, Honorable Lynne McGuire, Trial Judge.  Brandon G. Ellis appeals from the district court’s order denying his application for attorney fees and costs arising from this marital dissolution proceeding.  We conclude the court did not err in denying Father’s request pursuant to 43 O.S.2021 § 107.3(D) for attorney fees resulting from what he describes as Mother’s false abuse allegations, and this portion of the trial court’s decision is affirmed. However, based on the record before us, it was an abuse of discretion to deny an award of fees against Mother following a judicial balancing of the equities pursuant to 43 O.S.2021 § 110(D).  We also conclude it was an abuse of discretion under its inherent equitable power not to award fees against Mother and Mother’s attorneys for bad faith litigation misconduct.  These two latter decisions are reversed and the case remanded for the trial court to determine the reasonable and appropriate fees, costs and expenses to which Father is entitled.  We therefore affirm in part, reverse in part and remand for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion.  AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division II, by WISEMAN, P.J.; BARNES, C.J., concurs in part and dissents in part, and FISCHER, J., concurs. Nov. 18, 2024


Division III

122,197 – IN the Matter of F.N., L.N., S.N. and M.N., Alleged Deprived Children, Namilur Namilur, Natural Father, Appellant, vs. The State of Oklahoma, Tulsa County, Appellee Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Honorable Theresa Dreiling, Trial Judge. Namilur Namilur (Father) appeals the trial court’s orders filed on April 18, 2024, terminating his parental rights as to L.N., F.N., S.N., and M.N. We have reviewed the record and applicable law and are not persuaded by Father’s arguments. Clear and convincing evidence supports termination. We AFFIRM. Opinion by DOWNING, J.; MITCHELL, P.J., and GOREE, J., concur. Nov. 15, 2024


122,334 – Dr. David Peyok, Plaintiff/Appellant, vs. Dr. Stephen Brasseux, Defendant/Appellee, and Board of Regents for the Oklahoma Agricultural and Mechanical Colleges, ex rel Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, Appellees. Appeal from the District Court of Payne County, Oklahoma. Honorable Phillip C. Corley, Trial Judge. Plaintiff/Appellant, Dr. David Peyok (Dr. Peyok), appeals from the trial court’s grant of a Motion to Dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Dr. Peyok filed suit against Defendants/Appellees, Dr. Steven Brasseux and Board of Regents for the Oklahoma Agricultural and Mechanical Colleges, ex rel Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences (OSUCHS) alleging four causes of action on April 14, 2021. In the first cause of action, Dr. Peyok alleged a violation of due process rights and breach of contract only against OSUCHS. Dr. Peyok alleges in the factual background of his petition that OSUCHS improperly placed him on probation and ultimately terminated him from the Residency Program in retaliation for reporting what he claims was a Health Information Privacy and Portability Act (HIPPA) violation. However, Dr. Peyok’s first cause of action is based on alleged violations of a contract between Dr. Peyok and Oklahoma State University Medical Center (OSUMC). Because of this, OSUCHS filed a motion to dismiss the first cause of action and the trial court granted same. After a thorough review of the law and the record, we AFFIRM. Opinion by DOWNING, J.; MITCHELL, P.J., and GOREE, J., concur. Nov. 15, 2024


Division IV

121,555 – Steven Waskow, M.D., Plaintiff/Appellee, vs. Addison Brown, LLC, and Justin Brown, Defendants/Appellants, and Rick Lockhart and Nueces Capital, LLC, Defendants. Appeal from an Order of the District Court of Cleveland County, Hon. Lori Walkley, Trial Judge.  Defendants Addison Brown, LLC (LLC) and Justin Brown (Brown) (collectively, Defendants) appeal judgment in favor of Plaintiff Steven Waskow, M.D. (Waskow). The trial court awarded summary judgment to Waskow on his claims to rescind a $100,000 investment with LLC in exchange for working interests in a particular leasehold acquisition, pursuant to the Texas Securities Act (TSA), Vernon’s Ann. Texas Civ. St. Art. 581-1 et seq.  The trial court’s summary judgment also awarded Waskow damages for LLC’s breach of a contract promising to pay Waskow $130,000 in exchange for relinquishing his interest in that leasehold acquisition.  Thereafter, the trial court entered a final judgment, memorializing this relief, and awarded punitive damages and attorneys’ fees.  We conclude the trial court erred by granting Waskow a double recovery through his breach of contract and rescission claims.  The trial court’s Journal Entry of Judgment is hereby reversed, and this matter is reversed and remanded.  REVERSED AND REMANDED.  Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV, by HIXON, J.; HUBER, P.J., and BLACKWELL, J., concur. Nov. 15, 2024


121,123 – Gregory Scott Wilson, Petitioner/Appellee, vs. Michael Eugene Williams, Defendant/Appellant.  Appeal from the District Court of Pottawatomie County, Hon. J. David Cawthon, Trial Judge.  Defendant, Michael Eugene Williams, appeals the district court’s order granting petitioner, Gregory Scott Wilson, a final order of protection against him for five years on the basis of stalking.  We determine the district court did not abuse its discretion in entering a final protective order against Williams.  The district court’s Order of Protection is affirmed.  AFFIRMED.  Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV, by HUBER, P.J.; HIXON, J., and BLACKWELL, J., concur. Nov. 15, 2024


121,404 – Bryan Gilliam and Jessica Gilliam, as Parents and Next Friends of S.G. a Minor; and Derrick Marshall and Janice Marshall, as Parents and Next Friends of S.M., a Minor, Plaintiffs/Appellants, vs. Indianola Public Schools and Gary L. Gunckel, Defendants/Appellees. The plaintiffs appeal the court’s denial of their motion for new trial made on the basis of alleged juror misconduct. We find that the plaintiffs waived the issue by not moving for a mistrial or taking other appropriate action prior to the return of the jury’s verdict. As such, we affirm. AFFIRMED.  Opinion from the Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV by BLACKWELL, J.; HUBER, P.J., and HIXON, J., concur. Nov. 18, 2024