Dispositions Other Than By Published Opinion | June 18, 2025
Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals
Division I
122,310 – Ricky Williams, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Margaret Mitchell and Judy Stephens, Respondents/Appellees. Appeal from the District Court of LaFlore County, Oklahoma. Honorable Jonathan Sullivan, Trial Judge. Ricky Williams (Petitioner/Appellant) has appealed the underlying Order denying his Petition for Declaratory Judgment. Mr. Williams sought a Declaratory Judgment setting aside subsequent amendments made to a trust based upon the Settlor’s alleged incompetence. Mr. Williams never amended his Petition, nor were any additional issues identified in the Pre-Trial Conference Order. At trial, however, Mr. Williams presented another legal theory, alleging the subsequent amendments were void due to undue influence, coercion, and duress. The trial court, ultimately, denied Mr. Williams’ Petition, concluding he did not meet his burden of demonstrating testamentary incompetency. The trial court also found that Mr. Williams did not properly plead the issue of undue influence, and Mr. Williams has appealed this finding based upon his legal contention that claims of mental incapacity and undue influence are “intertwined.” We find no error in the trial court’s decision and, accordingly, AFFIRM. Opinion by PRINCE, J.; GOREE, P.J., and SWINTON, J., concur.
122,501 – In the Matter of B.T. and F.T., Alleged Deprived Children. State of Oklahoma, Petitioner/Appellee, v. Danial Tehrani, Respondent/Appellant. Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Honorable Theresa Dreiling, Trial Judge. Respondent/Appellant Danial Tehrani appeals from judgment terminating his parental rights to minor children B.T. and F.T. (collectively, Children). Following a bench trial, the court found termination of Tehrani’s rights was in Children’s best interests on the grounds of: 1) reoccurrence of the conditions leading to a previous deprived adjudication and 2) heinous and shocking abuse or neglect. The record shows the decision is supported by clear and convincing evidence and we therefore affirm. Opinion by SWINTON, J.; GOREE, P.J., PRINCE, J., concur.
122,578 – Compsource Mutual, Insurance Company, Petitioner, v. Juliette Santos, Ross Innovative Employment Solutions Corporation, QBE Insurance Corporation, The Kaiser Group d/b/a Dynanic Workforce Solutions and the Oklahoma Workers’ Compensation Commission, Respondents. Proceeding to Review an Order of The Workers’ Compensation Commission En Banc. Petitioner/Appellant CompSource Mutual Insurance Company appeals from an order of the Workers’ Compensation Commission en banc, reversing the decision of the administrative law judge (ALJ) determining that Respondent QBE Insurance Corporation (QBE) insured Respondent Kaiser Group, Inc., d/b/a/ Dynamic Workforce Solutions (Kaiser) at the time of a motor vehicle accident in which Emerald Santos was fatally injured. CompSource argues that QBE was the proper insurer at the time of the accident, and that the panel en banc erroneously reversed the decision of the ALJ. We sustain the order under Supreme Court Rule 1.202 (d). Opinion by SWINTON, J., GOREE, P.J., and PRINCE, J., concur.
Division II
Division III
122,605 – Betty Smith, an individual, Plaintiff/Appellee, v. H and H ventures, LLC, d/b/a Lifeway Homes, an Oklahoma limited liability company, Defendant/Appellant. Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Honorable Rebecca B. Nightingale, Trial Judge.Plaintiff/Appellee, Betty Smith, filed the instant action against Defendant/Appellant, H and H Ventures, L.L.C., d/b/a Lifeway Homes, an Oklahoma limited liability company, for breach of contract, false representations, failure to disclose/concealment of certain facts, breach of implied and express warranties, trespass, interference with Betty’s enjoyment of the property, violation of the Oklahoma Consumer Protection Act, and unjust enrichment. Defendant filed a motion to compel arbitration. After a hearing, the district court denied the motion to compel arbitration holding “there was no express agreement by Plaintiff to submit herself to an arbitration clause. Plaintiff did not sign the contracts, and although there may have been an oral contract for the sale of the [manufactured] home, there is no evidence of consent by Plaintiff to arbitrate.” The issue on appeal is whether the parties entered intoa valid, enforceable agreement to arbitrate Betty’s claims against Defendant. After de novo review of the record, this Court AFFIRMS the district court’s order. Opinion by BELL, C.J.; DOWNING, P.J., and MITCHELL, J., concur. June 13, 2025
122,623 – In re the Marriage of: Denise Gale Hubbard, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Frank Leroi Hubbard, Respondent/Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Payne County, Oklahoma. Honorable Katherine E. Thomas, Trial Judge. Appellant, Denise Hubbard (Wife) appeals from the trial court’s issuance of the Decree of Divorce and Dissolution of Marriage. Based on our review of the record and applicable law, we reject Wife’s argument and AFFIRM. Opinion by DOWNING, P.J.; BELL, C.J., and MITCHELL, J., concur. June 13, 2025
122,731 – Robert A. Fudge, Ralph Eugene Williams, Sallye B. Williams, Ralph Gene Williams and John V. Williams, Plaintiffs/Appellees, v. Revocable Inter Vivos Trust of Pamela R. Williams, U/T/D March 5, 2021, David Williams, individually, and Pamela R. Williams, Individually, Defendants/Appellants. Appeal from the District Court of Washington County, Oklahoma. Honorable Russell Vaclaw, Trial Judge. Revocable Inter Vivos Trust of Pamela R. Williams, U/T/D March 5, 2021, David Williams, individually, and Pamela R. Williams, individually seek relief from the issuance of a Temporary Injunction. After reviewing the record and the pertinent law, this Court concludes the trial court abused its discretion in awarding injunctive relief. Accordingly, the trial court’s order is REVERSED, AND the matter is REMANDED. Opinion by DOWNING, P.J.; BELL, C.J., and MITCHELLL, J., concur. June 13, 2025
121,855 – Randall Fuller, Plaintiff/Appellee v. Tamra Day, Defendant/Appellant. Appellant, Tamra Day (Day) appeals the March 21, 2024 Final Judgment and Order. As the trial court’s findings of fact are supported by sufficient competent evidence, we summarily affirm the Order pursuant to Oklahoma Supreme Court Rule 1.202(b), 12 O.S.2021, Ch. 15, App. 1. Opinion by DOWNING, P.J.; BELL, C.J., and MITCHELL, J., concur. June 17, 2025
122,348 – Raymond Greg Chapman, Plaintiff/Appellant, vs. Paul Gee and John Anderson, Jr., Attorney of Record/Appellees, vs. The City of Tulsa, Oklahoma, a Municipal Corporation, Defendant. Appeal from the District Court of TulsaCounty, Oklahoma. Honorable Kelly Greenough, Trial Judge. Raymond Greg Chapman (Chapman) appeals the trial court’s award of attorney fees to two of his attorneys. Chapman engaged the legal services of Paul Gee (Gee) by way of a contingency fee contract and the trial court awarded attorney fees based on quantum meruit. John W. Anderson Jr. (Anderson) was employed by Chapman based on an hourly rate and was also awarded attorney fees. A review of the record shows the findings of fact of the trial court are supported by sufficient competent evidence, the trial court’s conclusions of law adequately explain the decision, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion. 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, P.J.; BELL, C.J., and MITCHELL, J., concur. June 17, 2025
Division IV