Dispositions Other Than By Published Opinion | Feb. 28, 2024
Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals
Division I
120,955 – In the Matter of the Estate of Robert Dale Belter, Deceased, Rodger Sorrels, Appellant, v. By and through Drushea Tate, Special Administrator and Ada Carol Belter, Objector, Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Okmulgee County, Oklahoma. Honorable Cindy Pickering, Trial Judge. Appellant Rodger Sorrels appeals from orders of the trial court denying entry into probate a will of Decedent Robert Dale Belter and granting attorney fees and costs in favor of Appellee Carol Belter, objector to the probate. Appellant argues that the trial court improperly found undue influence over the Decedent, and that the award of attorney fees and costs was not supported by legal authority. We summarily affirm the orders under Oklahoma Supreme Court Rule 1.202. Opinion by SWINTON, P.J.; BELL, V.C.J., and PRINCE, J., concur. February 22, 2024
121,093 – In Re the Marriage of Mattie B. Clark, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Harry V. Clark, Respondent/Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Honorable April Seibert, Trial Judge. Petitioner/Appellant, Mattie Clark (now Mattie Scott), appeals an Order granting a Partial Motion to Vacate and/or Amend Decree of Dissolution and an Order denying her Motion for New Trial. The Parties to this proceeding were divorced by a default Decree of Divorce that was entered on January 31, 1997. As part of the property division award, Ms. Scott was awarded one-half of Mr. Clark’s military retirement benefits. During November, 2021, Mr. Clark filed his Partial Motion to Vacate and/or Amend Decree of Dissolution. In the Motion, he claimed that he was never provided with notice of the default Decree of Divorce and that since he has never been a resident of Oklahoma, the trial court did not have authority to divide his military retirement benefits. A hearing was held and the trial court agreed with Mr. Clark. After reviewing the record and applicable law, we find that the Order of the trial court should be AFFIRMED. Opinion by PRINCE, J.; BELL, V.C.J., and SWINTON, P.J., concur. February 22, 2024
121,157 – In the Matter of the Estate of J. Jerry Dickman, Deceased, Linda Jeanne Dickman, Appellant, v. Lynnwood Moore, Jeffrey Scott Dickman, “Jerry” David Dickman, Lou Dickman Henderson and Amy Dickman Gray, Appellees. Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma, Honorable Kurt G. Glassco, Trial Judge. Appellant, Linda Jeanne Dickman, appeals the trial court’s Order Approving Final Account, Final Settlement, Determination of Heirs, and Decreeing Distribution. In that context, Appellant has appealed the trial court’s specific finding that the sum of approximately $550.000.00 “owed to the estate” by the Decedent’s son, Scott Dickman, was “an advance on his inheritance and not a loan owed to the estate.” Appellant further contends that, if the exchange was a loan (and not an advance), there are contractual issues that remain unresolved. We hold that the trial court’s order that forms the basis of this appeal was not legally correct. Because the Decedent never forgave or Surrendered Scott Dickman’s duty to repay the loan in question, no gift was mad, as that term is used in 58 O.S. § 225. Accordingly, we reverse the Order and remand for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. Opinion by PRINCE, J.; BELL, V.C.J., and SWINTON, P.J., concur. February 22, 2024
Division II
120,923 – Ruby L. Godfrey, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. Sonny Cannon Auto Plaza, Inc., d/b/a Pioneer Auto, and Americredit, Inc., d/b/a GM Financial, Defendants/Appellees. Appeal from the District Court of Oklahoma County, Hon. C. Brent Dishman, Trial Judge. Ruby L. Godfrey appeals from an order of the district court granting a motion to compel arbitration. Based on our review, we conclude the trial court erred in deciding the issue of unconscionability. Pursuant to the language of the arbitration agreement, this issue has been delegated to the arbitrator. Therefore, in this respect, the trial court’s order is reversed. However, we otherwise affirm the court’s order granting the motion to compel arbitration. AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division II, by BARNES, C.J.; WISEMAN, P.J., and FISCHER, J., concur. February 22, 2024
Division III
121,236 – In re the Marriage of: Steven G. Dobson, Petitioner/Appellee, v. Melissa L. Dobson, Respondent/Appellant. Appeal from the District Court of Garvin County, Oklahoma. Honorable Steven Kendall, Trial Judge. Appellant, Melissa Dobson (Wife) appeals from the trial court’s issuance of the Decree of Dissolution of Marriage. Wife raises two propositions of error: (1) the trial court abused its discretion in awarding equitable credit to Steven Dobson; and (2) the trial court’s handling of the litigation was “highly irregular” resulting in harm to Wife. Based on our review of the record and applicable law, we reject Wife’s arguments and AFFIRM. Opinion by DOWNING, J.; MITCHELL, P.J., and GOREE, J., concur. February 21, 2024
121,333 – James Barnes, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. Braum’s, Inc., a domestic for profit Business Corporation, Defendant/Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Honorable Douglas E. Drummond, Trial Judge. James Barnes appealed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment on his claims of negligence against Braum’s based on allegations that he was injured when he slipped, fell, and injured his leg on the wet floor while entering Braum’s restaurant in Tulsa. Barnes fell adjacent to a wet-floor warning sign. Barnes’ response to the Motion for Summary Judgment did not address the merits of the motion but rather asked for additional time to respond pursuant to 12 O.S. §2056(F). The trial court did not grant the additional time request and granted the summary judgment. Granting continuances and additional time are matters of discretion for the trial judge. No abuse of discretion is shown here. We review the order granting summary judgment de novo. We find the motion had merit. The floor mat and wet-floor sign were appropriate warnings of the wet floor. Judgment AFFIRMED. Opinion by MITCHELL, P.J.; GOREE, J., and DOWNING, J., concur. February 21, 2024
121,531 – In the Matter of D.B., Alleged Deprived Child, Diana Benson, Appellant, v. State of Oklahoma, Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Garfield County, Oklahoma. Honorable Jason Seigars, Trial Judge. Diana Benson, (Mother) appeals the trial court’s order terminating her parental rights from her minor child, D.B. Mother argues the trial court erred when it found D.B. could not be safely returned to Mother’s home at the time the motion to terminate was filed and at the time of the termination hearing. Mother also argues the trial court erred when it found she failed to correct the condition relating to drug usage/addiction. After review of the record, we AFFIRM. Opinion by DOWNING, J.; MITCHELL, P.J., and GOREE, J., concur. February 21, 2024
Division IV
120,261 – Wilburton Village Apts., Plaintiff/Appellee, vs. Lisa (Kirk) Robinson et al., Defendant/Appellant. Appeal from the District Court of Latimer County, Hon. Margaret Nicolson, Trial Judge. Lisa (Kirk) Robinson (Tenant) appeals the trial court’s judgment in this forcible entry and detainer action awarding possession of the leased premises to Wilburton Village Apartments, as well as the order denying her motion for rehearing. Based on our review of the record and applicable law, we affirm the judgment and order denying rehearing. AFFIRMED. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV, by HIXON, J.; HUBER, P.J., and BLACKWELL, J., concur. February 23, 2024
120,606 – In re the Marriage of: Robin G. Talley, Petitioner/Appellee, vs.
Ronell J. Talley, Respondent/Appellant. Appeal from an Order of the District Court of Oklahoma County, Hon. Martha M. Oakes, District Judge. Ronnell Talley appeals the trial court’s grant of her ex-husband’s, appellee Robin Talley’s, motion to dismiss. Ronell argues that she is entitled to enforcement of a $60,000 property judgment contained in the parties’ 2011 divorce decree. Upon review, we affirm the court’s order and agree that Ronell’s claim to compel enforcement of the judgment is barred by the applicable statute of limitations. Opinion from the Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV by BLACKWELL, J.; HUBER, P.J., and HIXON, J., concur. February 23, 2024
121,394 (Consolidated with Case No. 121,395) – In the Matter of K.L., N.L., D.L., W.L., and G.L., Alleged Deprived Children, Bonnie Beth Mills Lilly and Henry Lilly, III, Appellants, vs. State of Oklahoma, Defendant/Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Comanche County, Hon. Lisa Shaw, Trial Judge. Bonnie Beth Mills Lilly and Henry Lilly, III appeal the trial court’s orders terminating their parental rights to their minor children. They argue the jury’s verdicts should be reversed due to alleged evidentiary errors and violations of the right to a speedy trial and due process. Based on our review of the record and applicable law, we affirm the trial court’s orders. AFFIRMED. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV, by HIXON, J.; HUBER, P.J., and BLACKWELL, J., concur. February 26, 2024
120,422 – Diane Martin, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Emmett Martin, Deceased, Plaintiff/Appellant, and Sabrina Martin, Plaintiff vs. The Board of County Commissioners for the County of Oklahoma County, The Oklahoma County Sheriff, P.D. Taylor, in his official capacity, and Andres Sanchez, in his individual capacity, Defendants/Appellees. Appeal from the District Court of Oklahoma County, Hon. Susan Stallings, Trial Judge. Diane Martin, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Emmett Martin (“Estate”), appeals the dismissal of the Estate’s claims against Defendant Armor Correctional Health Services, Inc., (“Armor”) arising from Emmett Martin’s death while detained at the Oklahoma County jail. Estate also appeals summary adjudication in favor of Oklahoma Sheriff P.D. Taylor in his official capacity, arising from this same incident. On review of the record, we affirm the trial court’s order dismissing Estate’s claims against Armor. We reverse the trial court’s order granting summary judgment to Sheriff on Estate’s claim for violation of Okla. Const. art. 2, § 30, i.e., excessive force claim, and any wrongful death claim arising therefrom. AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV, by HIXON, J.; HUBER, P.J., and BLACKWELL, J., concur. February 27, 2024