Dispositions Other Than By Published Opinion | April 5, 2023
Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals
Division I
120,306 – Tyler Scott Paulsen, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. City of Eufaula, Eufaula Police Department and Don Murray, Chief of Police, Defendants/Appellees. Appeal from the District Court of McIntosh County, Oklahoma. Honorable Brendon Bridges, Trial Judge. Appellant, Tyler Scott Paulsen, appeals from the trial court’s March 3, 2022, denial of his Petition to Vacate Judgment filed on January 28, 2020. Appellant argued the previous granting of summary judgment in favor of Appellees was predicated on fraudulent statements by Appellees and/or their legal counsel that a diligent search was made for records related to Appellant’s Open Records Request. Attached to the Petition to Vacate Judgment was the deposition testimony of a former police officer of the Eufaula Police Department and correspondence from Appellant’s counsel to Appellees’ counsel. The trial court found Appellant failed to provide adequate grounds for vacating the prior order. Upon review of the record before us, we AFFIRM. Opinion by DOWNING, J.; GOREE, P.J., and SWINTON, J., concur. March 31, 2023
120,143 – Derek Tyner, Mona Tyner, and Mona Tyner, as Special Administrator of the Estate of Cobie Tyner, Plaintiffs/Appellees, v. Vic Regalado, in his official capacity as Sheriff of Tulsa County, Defendant/Appellant. Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Honorable Kelly Greenough, Trial Judge. Defendant/Appellant Vic Regalado appeals from the Journal Entry of Judgment in favor of Plaintiffs/Appellees Derek Tyner, Mona Tyner, and Mona Tyner as Special Administrator of the Estate of Cobie Tyner (collectively Appellees). Cobie Tyner (Tyner) died after his motorcycle collided with another vehicle on May 14, 2017. Appellees alleged the negligence of the Appellant’s employee caused Tyner’s death. The jury found in favor of the Appellees as to the claim of negligence, finding Deputy Andrew Titsworth (Titsworth), Appellant’s employee, 60% negligent and Tyner 40% negligent. The jury awarded damages in the amount of $1,650,000.00. After a hearing, the trial court reduced the amount of damages to $175,000.00, pursuant to the Oklahoma Governmental Tort Claims Act (GTCA). See 51 O.S. § 154(A)(2). Based on our review of the record and applicable law, we find that the trial court abused its discretion in reversing the grant of partial summary adjudication of the first trial judge on the case. The first trial judge granted Appellant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment to establish the standard of care applied at trial should be reckless disregard for the safety of others. The trial court did not instruct consistent with the prior ruling that was based on the applicable statute. This case is reversed and remanded for a new trial. Opinion by DOWNING, J.; BELL, J., (sitting by designation) concurs and SWINTON, J., concurs in result. March 28, 2023
Division II
120,694 – In the Matter of N.S., Alleged Deprived Child, Joshua Hynson, Appellant, v. State of Oklahoma, Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Haskell County, Hon. Brian Henderson, Trial Judge. Joshua Hynson (Father) appeals the trial court’s August 25, 2022 order terminating his parental rights to the minor child, N.S. The primary issue is whether State failed to meet its burden of showing by clear and convincing evidence that termination of Father’s rights was in the child’s best interests. Based on our review of the record and applicable law, we reverse the trial court’s August 25, 2022 order terminating Father’s rights because State failed to present clear and convincing evidence at trial that termination was in N.S.’s best interests. REVERSED. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division II, by HIXON, J.; BARNES, V.C.J., and WISEMAN, P.J., concur. April 3, 2023
120,914 — Michael Dods, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. School District No. I-57 of Garfield County, State of Oklahoma, a/k/a Enid School District, Defendant/ Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Garfield County, Hon. Dennis W. Hladik, Trial Judge. Plaintiff Michael Dods appeals the trial court’s order granting Defendant’s motion for summary judgment in this employment termination case. Plaintiff claims genuine issues of material fact exist precluding summary judgment in School District’s favor. Plaintiff, however, has failed to properly controvert any of School District’s “statements of undisputed fact” as required by District Court Rule 13, 12 O.S.2021, ch. 2, app. After a thorough review of the record, we conclude, as did the trial court, that based on the undisputed material facts summary judgment in School District’s favor was proper, and we therefore affirm the trial court’s entry of summary judgment. AFFIRMED. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division II, by WISEMAN, P.J.; BARNES, V.C.J., and HIXON, J., concur. April 4, 2023
Division III
Division IV