Dispositions Other Than By Published Opinion | April 1, 2026
Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals
Division I
Division II
121,405 – Michael O’Keefe, an individual, Plaintiff/Appellee, and Scott Hale, an individual, Plaintiff, vs. Oklahoma Christian University, a domestic ot-for-profit corporation, and Steven Eck, individually, Defendants/Appellants. Proceeding to review an Order of the District Court of Oklahoma County, Hon. Richard C. Ogden, Trial Judge. Oklahoma Christian University and Stephen Eck (collectively “University”) appeal the district court’s order partially denying their motion to compel arbitration and allowing Michael O’Keefe’s tort claim based on defamation, false light, and intentional infliction of emotional distress theories of recovery, to proceed in the district court. The district court found the arbitration clause in O’Keefe’s employment agreement required arbitration of his breach of contract claim but not his tort claim. Because the plain and unambiguous language in the arbitration clause covers O’Keefe’s tort claim, we reverse the portion of the district court’s order declining to compel arbitration of that claim and remand with instructions to grant the University’s motion to compel arbitration in full and to stay all of O’Keefe’s claims pending the outcome of arbitration. REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division II, by FISCHER, J.; WISEMAN, P.J., and HIXON, C.J., concur. March 25, 2026
122,745 – In the Matter of the Estate of Perry Wilburn Webb, Deceased: Arthur Perry Webb, Appellant, vs. Rebecca MacArthur and Priscilla Carder, Appellees. Appeal from an Order of the District Court of Canadian County, Hon. Paul Hesse, District Judge. Arthur Webb, son of the decedent, Perry Webb, appeals the trial court’s admission of a copy of his father’s 1991 will to probate. Upon review, we find that the orders of the trial court finding that the appellees sufficiently proved that the original will was in existence at the time of the decedent’s death and met the other evidentiary requirements of 58 O.S. § 82 related to a lost or destroyed will were not clearly contrary to the weight of the evidence. Accordingly, the court did not err in admitting a copy of the 1991 will to probate. AFFIRMED. Opinion from the Court of Civil Appeals, Division II by BLACKWELL, J.; WISEMAN, P.J., and FISCHER, J., concur. March 27, 2026
122,279 – Judith Latus, Plaintiff/Appellant, vs. City of Broken Arrow, Defendant/Appellee, and Paragon Contractors, LLC; State of Oklahoma Department of Transportation; City of Coweta; Wagoner County Board of Commissioners, Defendants. Proceeding to review an Order of the District Court of Wagoner County, Hon. Rebecca Hunter, Trial Judge. Judith Latus appeals an order of the district court granting judgment in favor of the City of Broken Arrow after a successful demurrer to the evidence at trial. Latus asserts district court error, claiming she presented a prima facie case of negligent injury to property. The sole issue determined by the district court was that Latus failed to show Broken Arrow had a duty in the design, construction, or maintenance of a road improvement project which Latus claims caused injury to her real property. After review, we conclude the district court erred in finding Latus presented insufficient evidence of duty to defeat the demurrer, and we reverse and remand for further proceedings. REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. Opinion from the Court of Civil Appeals, Division II by FISCHER, J.; HUBER, J. (sitting by designation) and BLACKWELL, J. (sitting by designation) concur. March 27, 2026
122,636 – Judith Latus, Plaintiff/Appellant, vs. City of Broken Arrow, Defendant/Appellee, and Paragon Contractors, LLC; State of Oklahoma Department of Transportation; City of Coweta; Wagoner County Board of County Commissioners, Defendants. Appeal from an Order of the District Court of Wagoner County, Hon. Rebecca Hunter, Trial Judge. Judith Latus appeals a trial court order awarding the City of Broken Arrow prevailing party attorney fees. In Case No. 122,279, also issued this date, this Court reversed the trial court’s decision granting judgment to Broken Arrow. As a result of our decision in Case No. 122,279, Broken Arrow “is no longer the prevailing party and is not entitled to an award of fees and costs on that basis.” REVERSED. Opinion from the Court of Civil Appeals, Division II by FISCHER, J.; HUBER (sitting by designation), and BLACKWELL, J., concur. March 27, 2026
123,099 (Companion with Case No. 123,650 which was consolidated with Case No. 123,798) — In the Matter of A.P.-J., an Alleged Deprived Child, Steven Byrd, Appellant, vs. State of Oklahoma, Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Oklahoma County, Honorable Kaitlyn Allen, Trial Judge. Steven Byrd appeals a trial court order finding he is able to represent himself and making determinations regarding visitation in this deprived child proceeding. After reviewing the record on appeal and applicable law, we conclude Byrd failed to show reversible error, and we affirm. AFFIRMED. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division II, by WISEMAN, P.J.; HIXON, C.J., and FISCHER, J., concur. March 31, 2026
Division III
123,382 – Daniel Parrott, Appellant, v. Oklahoma Tax Commission, Appellee. Proceeding to review an Order of a three-judge panel of the Oklahoma Tax Commission. Daniel Parrott (Parrott) appeals the Oklahoma Tax Commission Order adopting the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Recommendation by the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) wherein the ALJ found Parrott’s request for refunds for tax years 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018 were properly denied by the Income Tax Accounts Division as the requests were not timely. After a review of the law and the record, we AFFIRM. Opinion by DOWNING, P.J.; PRINCE, V.C.J., and MITCHELL, J., concur. March 31, 2026
Division IV
122,466 – Davis Ballpark, LLC, d/b/a Central Oklahoma Optimist Club (#01758), and Surviving Members and Successors of the Southside Optimist Club of Oklahoma City, Albert Neece as Class Representative, Plaintiffs/Appellees, v. Turtlestone, LLC, and Wallace W. Stark, Defendants/Appellants, and Adam Davis, and Home Creations, LLC, Defendants. Appeal from the District Court of Cleveland County, Hon. Michael Tupper, Trial Judge. Appellants seek review of the district court’s Order granting Appellees’ Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement. Appellants challenge that portion of the court’s Order finding that the parties agreed to mutually release all claims and that the claim in a certain quiet title action was released through the parties’ agreement to execute mutual releases. Based on our review, we vacate this portion of the district court’s Order. All other aspects of the district court’s Order are left undisturbed. VACATED IN PART. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV, by BARNES, J.; HUBER, J., concurs, and BLACKWELL, P.J., dissents. March 25, 2026
122,668 – In the Matter of the Estate of Alonzo L. Fields, Deceased: Evonnda Fields, Appellant, v. Beverly Berry, Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Oklahoma County, Hon. Elizabeth H. Kerr, Trial Judge. This appeal arises from an action in probate court. Evonnda Fields appeals from an order of the district court sustaining the Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement filed by Beverly Berry. We conclude that, in enforcing the parties’ agreement, the district court did not exercise authority beyond its statutory authority; the district court did not lack subject matter jurisdiction; and Ms. Berry has sufficient interest or stake in the outcome and, therefore, does not lack standing. Consequently, we affirm the district court’s order sustaining Ms. Berry’s Motion to Enforce. AFFIRMED. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV, by BARNES, J.; BLACKWELL, P.J., and HUBER, J., concur. March 27, 2026
122,692 – Drs. Dan Cullum, Alvin Philipose, Damon Coffman, Ryan Novak, Kim Hester, James Hickman, and Doug Cook, Plaintiffs/Appellants, vs. State of Oklahoma, ex rel. Oklahoma Board of Chiropractic Examiners, Defendant/ Appellee. Appeal from an Order of the District Court of Beaver County, Hon. Jon Parsley, District Judge. Drs. Dan Cullum, Alvin Philipose, Damon Coffman, Ryan Novak, Kim Hester, and Doug Cook appeal the trial court’s decision finding the Oklahoma Board of Chiropractic Examiners correctly determined that platelet injection therapy was not within the scope of practice for chiropractors. Upon review, we affirm the decision of the district court. AFFIRMED. Opinion from the Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV by BLACKWELL, J.; HUBER, J., and WISEMAN, J. (sitting by designation), concur. March 30, 2026
122,267 – City of Lawton, Oklahoma, a Municipal Corporation, Plaintiff/Appellee, vs. International Union of Police Associations Local 24, and Robert Hinkle, Defendants/Appellants. Appeal from the District Court of Comanche County, Hon. Jay Walker, Trial Judge. Appellants/defendants, International Union of Police Associations Local 24, and Robert Hinkle (collectively, Appellants), appeal a district court order vacating an arbitration award in favor of Appellants. Under our appellate standard of review, the record does not demonstrate that the arbitrator’s award in this case should be vacated. Accordingly, we find that the district court erred in vacating the award. As such, we remand this case for the district court to reinstate the arbitrator’s award. REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV, by HUBER, J.; BLACKWELL, P.J., and BARNES, J., concur. March 31, 2026
122,268 – City of Lawton, Oklahoma, a Municipal Corporation, Plaintiff/Appellee, vs. International Union of Police Associations Local 24, and Nathan Ronan, Defendants/Appellants. Appeal from the District Court of Comanche County, Hon. Jay Walker, Trial Judge. Appellants/defendants, International Union of Police Associations Local 24, and Nathan Ronan (collectively, Appellants), appeal a district court order vacating an arbitration award in favor of Appellants. Under our appellate standard of review, the record does not demonstrate that the arbitrator’s award in this case should be vacated. Accordingly, we find that the district court erred in vacating the award. As such, we remand this case for the district court to reinstate the arbitrator’s award. REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV, by HUBER, J.; BLACKWELL, P.J., and BARNES, J., concur. March 31, 2026