Dispositions Other Than By Published Opinion | Feb. 12, 2025
Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals
Division I
Division II
122,352 – Crystal Lakes Homeowners’ Association, Inc., an Oklahoma not-for-profit corporation, Plaintiff/Appellee, vs. Just Like Home Rentals, LLC, an Oklahoma limited liability company, Defendant/Appellant. Appeal from an Order of the District Court of McClain County, Hon. Charles Gray, Associate District Judge. The appellant, Just Like Home Rentals LLC, appeals the court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of appellee, Crystal Lakes Homeowners’ Association, Inc. The court granted summary judgment on Crystal Lakes’ claims for breach of contract, specific performance, and an injunction. Upon review, we find Crystal Lakes was not entitled to summary judgment, and we thereby reverse and remand for entry of judgment in favor of Just Like Home. REVERSED AND REMANDED. Opinion from the Court of Civil Appeals Division II by BLACKWELL, J.; WISEMAN, P.J., and FISCHER, J., concur. Feb. 7, 2025
Division III
121,653 – Mate Suto, d/b/a Village Glass, Plaintiff/Appellee, v. Equity Bank, a Kansas Chartered bank, the surviving corporation of the merger of Equity Bank, a Kansas chartered bank, and City Bank and Trust Company, an Oklahoma chartered bank, Defendant/Appellant. Appeal from the District Court of Texas County, Oklahoma. Honorable Abby M. Cash, Trial Judge. This breach of contract case arises from a dispute overcompensation for construction work performed by a self-employed construction worker on a house owned by a bank. At the bench trial, the primary point of contention was whether the terms of the parties’ oral contract specified the worker would be compensated by the bank on a flat-fee or hourly basis. The court reviewed the exhibits and heard testimony from the parties and fact witnesses before it awarded judgment for the worker calculated at an hourly rate. The bank appealed the damages award and the court’s award of prejudgment interest under 12 O.S. 2021 §727.1(H). We reviewed the record for any competent evidence tending to support the verdict, and finding evidence that supports the court’s judgment in the worker’s testimony and his time sheets, we AFFIRM. Opinion by MITCHELL, J.; BELL, C.J., and DOWNING, P.J., CONCUR. Feb. 7, 2025
121,720 – Howard-Estruct, LLC, Plaintiff/Appellee/Counter-Appellant, v Rural Water District No/. 3, Washington County, Oklahoma, Defendant/Appellant/Counter-Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Washington County, Oklahoma. Honorable Russell Vaclaw, Trial Judge. Both parties, Howard-Estruct, LLC (HE), and Rural Water District No. 3, Washington County, Oklahoma (RWD), filed petitions in error. The Oklahoma Supreme Court consolidated the cases under RWD’s appeal. RWD awarded HE a contract for a construction project known as the Caney River Raw Water Supply Project (project). Disputes arose during the project and ultimately in 2013 HE filed suit alleging multiple claims against RWD and seeking damages. RWD counterclaimed and in 2022 a jury trial was commenced. The jury found both parties breached the contract and awarded both parties damages. The parties both sought attorney fees and costs. The trial court denied same to both parties. After a thorough review of the record on appeal and the applicable law, this Court affirms in part and reverses in part. Opinion by DOWNING, P.J.; BELL, C.J., and MITCHELL, J., CONCUR. Feb. 7, 2025
121,789 – Hester Anne Brown, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Nathan Scott Gilley, Respondent/Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Honorable Patrick Pickerill, Trial Judge. In this paternity action, Petitioner/Appellant, Hester Anne Brown, the biological mother of the minor child, M.E.B. (Mother), appeals from the trial court’s paternity decree awarding sole custody of M.E.B., to Respondent/Appellee, Nathan Scott Gilley, the biological father of M.E.B. (Father). Mother also appeals from the trial court’s decree ordering Mother to pay child support and child support arrearage and denying Mother visitation until she meets certain standards. Mother claims the trial court erred when it permitted the paternity action to proceed without removing the court appointed Guardian ad Litem (GAL); when it imposed “impossible” standards for Mother to meet to obtain visitation; when it failed to allow a mechanism for Mother to request discovery without violating protective orders; when it calculated Mother’s child support obligation; and when the court awarded child support arrearage. After reviewing the record, we cannot find the trial court abused its discretion or held contrary to law when it entered its decree. The trial court’s decree is AFFIRMED. Opinion by BELL, C.J.; DOWNING, P.J., and MITCHELL, J., CONCUR. Feb. 7, 2025
121,903 – In the Matter of the Estate of Terry L. Cowan, Deceased, Elizabeth A. Cowen, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Lorri Cowan, Respondent/Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Delaware County, Oklahoma. Honorable Dave Crutchfield, Trial Judge. Appellant, Elizabeth Cowan appeals the Order Regarding Motion to Intervene by Surviving Spouse entered on December 15, 2023, denying her Motion to Intervene. Based on our review of the record and applicable law, we AFFIRM. Opinion by DOWNING, P.J.; BELL, C.J., and MITCHELL, J., CONCUR. Feb. 7, 2025
122,005 – Jackson Shepherd and Mallory Scott on behalf of themselves and all students similarly situated, Plaintiffs/Appellants, vs. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education, et. al., Defendants/Appellees (comp. w/122,007). Appeal from the District Court of Oklahoma County, Oklahoma. Honorable Don Andrews, Trial Judge. Jackson Shepherd (Shepherd) and Mallory Scott (Scott) (collectively Appellants) appeal the August 11, 2023 Order on Motion to Dismiss (Order) granting Board of Regents for the Oklahoma Agricultural and Mechanical Colleges’ (Board of Regents) Motion to Dismiss. In the Order, the trial court, relying on 12 O.S.2021, § 2012(B)(6) and Vijay v. State of Oklahoma ex rel., Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma, No. 119,809, (COCA Div. IV Mar. 4, 2022) (unpublished) cert. denied (Okla. Sup. Ct. Oct. 24, 2022), determined Appellants failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. As the trial court’s findings of fact are supported by sufficient competent evidence and the findings of fact and conclusions of law are more than adequately explained in the appealed Order, we summarily AFFIRM the Order PURSUANT TO OKLAHOMA SUPREME COURT RULE 1.202(b) AND (d), 12 O.S.2021, Ch. 15, App. 1. Opinion by DOWNING, P.J.; MITCHELL, J., and GOREE, J. (sitting by designation), CONCUR. Feb. 7, 2025
122,007 – Jackson Shepherd and Mallory Scott on behalf of themselves and all students similarly situated, Plaintiffs/Appellants, vs. Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education, Defendant/Appellee (comp. w/122,005). Appeal from the District Court of Oklahoma County, Oklahoma. Honorable Don Andrews, Trial Judge. Jackson Shepherd (Shepherd) and Mallory Scott (Scott) (collectively Appellants) appeal the August 11, 2023 Order on Summary Judgment (Order) granting summary judgment in favor of Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education (OSRHE). In the Order, the trial court, relying on Vijay v. State of Oklahoma ex rel., Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma, No. 119,809, (COCA Div. IV Mar. 4, 2022) (unpublished) cert. denied (Okla. Sup. Ct. Oct. 24, 2022), determined there was no substantial controversy as to any material fact and found OSRHE was entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law. As the trial court’s findings of fact are supported by sufficient competent evidence and the findings of fact and conclusions of law are more than adequately explained in the appealed Order, we summarily AFFIRM the Order PURSUANT TO OKLAHOMA SUPREME COURT RULE 1.202(b) AND (d), 12 O.S.2021, Ch. 15, App. 1. Opinion by DOWNING, P.J.; MITCHELL, J., and GOREE, J. (sitting by designation), CONCUR. Feb. 7, 2025
122,313 – Carl Gragg, Jr., individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Carl Gragg, Sr., Deceased, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. Azhar Shakeel, M.D.; Kim Gage, M.D.; Angela McGuire, D.O.; and Kenneth Kirk, M.D., Defendants/Appellees, and Okmulgee Memorial Hospital and Insung Kim, M.D., Defendants. Appeal from the District Court of Okmulgee County, Oklahoma. Honorable Pandee Ramirez, Trial Judge. Plaintiff/Appellant Carl Gragg, Jr., individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Carl Gragg, Sr., deceased, (Plaintiff) appeals from the trial court’s order dismissing his action for medical malpractice against Defendants/Appellees Azhar Shakeel, M.D.; Kim Gage, M.D.; Angela McGuire, D.O.; and Kenneth Kirk, M.D. (Defendant Doctors). The trial court dismissed the case for failure to prosecute, finding (1) Plaintiff failed to articulate an acceptable excuse or reason for his inaction and delay in prosecuting the case and (2) Defendant Doctors have been prejudiced by Plaintiff’s delay and inaction. We find the court did not abuse its discretion and AFFIRM. Opinion by MITCHELL, J.; BELL, C.J., and DOWNING, P.J., CONCUR. Feb. 7, 2025
Division IV
122,642 – Candice Christian, Plaintiff/Appellant, vs. James S. Matthews, Jr., Defendant/Appellee, and Andrew Gass, Defendant. Appeal from the District Court of Oklahoma County, Hon. Richard Ogden, Trial Judge. Plaintiff, Candice Christian, appeals a district court order granting summary judgment in favor of defendant, James S. Matthews, Jr., and against Christian in this legal malpractice action. We find the district court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of Matthews and against Christian. The court’s Journal Entry of Judgment is affirmed. AFFIRMED. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV, by HUBER, J.; BARNES, P.J., and HIXON, V.C.J., concur. Feb. 5, 2025
121,417 – Stephen M. Vance, as Trustee of the Stephen M. Vance 2017 Trust dated October 9, 2017 and as Trustee of the Stephen M. Vance Children’s Trust, Plaintiff/Appellee, vs. Teri Vance Hubberling, The Teri Vance Hubberling Children’s Trust, Alan Broce Vance, The Alan Broce Vance Children’s Trust, Michael Firth Hubberling, Julie Bartlett Vance and Broce Ranch, Inc., an Oklahoma Domestic for Profit Farm/Ranch Corporation, Defendants/Appellants. Appeal from an Order of the District Court of Cleveland County, Hon. Jeff Virgin, Trial Judge. Defendant Appellants Teri Vance Hubberling (“Teri”), The Teri Vance Hubberling Children’s Trust, Alan Broce Vance (“Alan”), The Alan Broce Vance Children’s Trust, Michael Firth Hubberling, Julie Bartlett Vance and the Broce Ranch, Inc. (“Ranch,” or collectively, Defendants), appeal a temporary injunction entered in favor of Plaintiff, Stephen M. Vance as Trustee of the Stephen M. Vance 2017 Trust Dated October 9, 2017 and as Trustee of the Stephen M. Vance Children’s Trust (“Stephen”). Siblings Teri, Alan and Stephen are shareholders in Broce Ranch, Inc. The injunction temporarily precluded Teri and Alan from completing a “cash out” or “squeeze out” merger which would have ultimately divested Stephen of his shares in Ranch prior to resolution of Stephen’s claims in the underlying suit. On review of the briefing and record on appeal, we affirm the trial court’s grant of a temporary injunction pending resolution of this action on the merits. AFFIRMED. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV, by HIXON, V.C.J.; BARNES, P.J., and HUBER, J., concur. Feb. 5, 2025
121,872 – (Consolidated with Case No. 121,906) – In the Matter of M.I.A.P., N.L.M.P., and T.M.B.P., Alleged Deprived Children, Ashley Potter, Appellant, vs. State of Oklahoma, Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Washita County, Hon. Donna L. Dirickson, Trial Judge. Ashley Potter (Mother) appeals a district court order terminating her parental rights to her three minor children, MIAP, NLMP, and TMBP, after a jury verdict. The issues on appeal are whether the State of Oklahoma proved by clear and convincing evidence the required elements for termination of Mother’s parental rights of MIAP, NLMP, and TMBP pursuant to 10A O.S.2021 § 1-4-904(B)(5), (14), and (17), and whether the district court abused its discretion in admitting evidence. After review of the record and applicable law, we conclude State met its burden of proving at least one ground for each child by clear and convincing evidence to support termination. State also presented clear and convincing evidence that it was in the best interest of the children to terminate Mother’s parental rights. In addition, Mother has not shown reversible error in the court’s admissions of evidence. We affirm the district court’s order. AFFIRMED. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV, by HUBER, J.; BARNES, P.J., and HIXON, V.C.J., concur. Feb. 6, 2025
121,185 – Rick J. Natale, individually, as Trustee of the Jo Ann Welch Revocable Trust dated September 8, 1995, and as Trustee of The Rick J. Natale Resulting Trust, as Directed by the Jo Ann Welch Revocable Trust, Plaintiff/Appellee, vs. National Financial Services, LLC, a foreign limited liability company, Defendant/Appellant, and Kestra Investment Services, LLC, a foreign limited liability company, and Karen Cunningham, an individual, Defendants. Appeal from the District Court of Oklahoma County, Hon. Don Andrews, Trial Judge. National Financial Services, LLC (NFS) appeals from part of an order denying its motion to compel arbitration as to Rick J. Natale’s (Natale) claims seeking to recover money damages against NFS for the alleged loss in value to the interests of the Jo Ann Welch Revocable Trust beneficiaries. Based on our review of the facts and applicable law, we reverse and remand this case with instruction to grant NFS’ motion to compel arbitration as to Natale’s claims alleged in his capacity as beneficiary for monetary damages. REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV, by HUBER, J.; BARNES, P.J., and HIXON, V.C.J., concur. Feb. 10, 2025
121,926 – Katrius Muhammad and Charles Muhammad, Intervening Grandparents/Appellants, vs. Elena Muhammad, Defendant/Appellee, and Edward Wyre, Jr., Petitioner/Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Oklahoma County, Hon. Sharon W. Byers, Trial Judge. Katrius Muhammad and Charles Muhammad (Grandparents) appeal the trial court’s January 16, 2024 order denying their requests for grandparental visitation. Based on our review of the limited appellate record and applicable law, we affirm the trial court’s order. AFFIRMED. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV, by HIXON, V.C.J.; BARNES, P.J., and HUBER, J., concur. Feb. 11, 2025