Dispositions Other Than By Published Opinion | Oct. 14, 2026
Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals
Division I
123,155 – Allison Dori Swift a/k/a Sabatini, Petitioner/Appellee, v. Luke Wesley Cypert, Defendant/Appellant. Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Honorable Kevin Keller, Trial Judge. Defendant/Appellant Luke Cypert appeals from a final protective order entered on February 6, 2025 on the basis of stalking and the denial of his motion to vacate the protective order. We affirm. Opinion by SWINTON, P.J.; BELL, J., and GOREE, J., concur. October 13, 2026
123,693 – In the Matter of the Estate of Mamie A. Boggs, deceased, Sonya Boggs, Appellant, v. Kathryn A. Sanford, Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Cleveland County, Oklahoma. Honorable Bethany Stanley, Trial Judge. The probate court’s finding, that the Last Will and Testament was entirely invalid as the product of undue influence, was not contrary to the clear weight of the evidence. AFFIRMED. Opinion by GOREE, J.; SWINTON, P.J., and BELL, J., concur. October 13, 2026
Division II
123,642 – In the Matter of I.C., M.C., G.C., and E.C., Alleged Deprived Children, Isaiah Coatney, Appellant, vs. State of Oklahoma, Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Oklahoma County, Honorable Kevin C. McCray, Trial Judge. Isaiah Coatney, Sr., appeals a trial court order terminating his parental rights to his minor children, I.C., M.C., G.C., and E.C. The only issue raised by Coatney on appeal is whether objections to evidence should have been raised on his behalf at trial. After review, we conclude Coatney has failed to show reversible error, and we affirm the trial court’s order terminating his parental rights. AFFIRMED. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division II, by WISEMAN, P.J.; HIXON, C.J., and FISCHER, J., concur. October 7, 2026
123,636 – Akbar Heydari Goudarzi, Plaintiff/Appellant, vs. Abbas Mike Heidary, Defendant/Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Oklahoma County, Hon. Richard C. Ogden, Trial Judge. Akbar Heydari Goudarzi (“Goudarzi”) appeals an Order Confirming Sheriff’s Sale in this partition action. We find that, while the confirmation of the sheriff’s sale should be affirmed, the district court erred in its confirmation of the sheriff’s sale with no provision for Goudarzi’s share and its decision regarding the value of the parties’ interest in the property was clearly against the weight of the evidence, inequitable and an abuse of discretion. Accordingly, we affirm the Order Confirming Sheriff’s Sale as modified to direct that Heidary deposit $184,714.39 with the Court Clerk of Oklahoma County and thereafter, to be distributed by the Court Clerk for the use and benefit of Akbar Heydari Goudarzi. The remaining language of the Order Confirming Sheriff’s Sale is unchanged. AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division II, by HIXON, C.J.; WISEMAN, P.J., and FISCHER, J., concur. October 8, 2026
123,012 – (Companion with Case No. 121,756, Case No. 123,028, and Case No. 123,575)-Jeremy Johnson, Plaintiff/Appellee, vs. L.G. Martin, Defendant/ThirdParty Plaintiff, vs. Barry Tucker, James Bryant, Michael Downey, and Chuck Webster, Third-Party Defendants, and Kirk A. Marshall, Appellant. Proceeding to review an Order of the District Court of Seminole County, Hon. Trisha D. Smith, Trial Judge. Appellant Kirk A. Marshall appeals the district court judge’s refusal to disqualify herself from post-trial proceedings and the district court’s order assessing sanctions against Marshall in the amount of $13,150. Sanctions were assessed against Marshall in his capacity as an attorney representing a client in an underlying case. We are asked to review whether the district court should have granted the motion to disqualify filed by Marshall on his client’s behalf, and whether the district court abused its discretion when it awarded sanctions against Marshall for submitting an improper or frivolous filing. Because Marshall has failed to demonstrate any abuse of discretion in its refusal to disqualify or to award sanctions, the district court’s order is affirmed. AFFIRMED. Opinion from the Court of Civil Appeals, Division II by FISCHER, J.; HIXON, C.J., and
WISEMAN, P.J ., concur. October 9, 2026
121,756 – (Companion with Case No. 123,012, Case No. 123,028, and Case No. 123,575) – Jeremy Johnson, Plaintiff/Appellee, L.G. Martin, Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff/Appellant, vs. Barry Tucker, Kristy Bryant, Special Administrator of the Estate of James Bryant, deceased, Michael Downey, and Chuck Webster Third-Party Defendants/Appellees, and Sheriff Shannon Smith and Deputy Sheriff Matt Haley, Third-Party Defendants. Proceeding to review an Order of the District Court of Seminole County, Hon. Trisha D. Smith, Trial Judge. Defendant/Appellant L.G. Martin appeals the judgment entered on a jury verdict rendered against him and in favor of Plaintiff/Appellee Jeremy Johnson in this dispute over damages caused by Martin’s stray cattle cared for by Johnson and others. Martin also appeals jury verdicts rendered on Martin’s counterclaims against Johnson and third-party claims against Appellees Barry Tucker, James Bryant, and Michael Downey. Finding no error in the trial court’s evidentiary rulings or instructions to the jury, we affirm the judgment. AFFIRMED. Opinion from the Court of Civil Appeals, Division II by FISCHER, J.; HIXON, C.J., and WISEMAN, P.J., concur. October 9, 2026
123,028 – (Companion with Case No. 121,756, Case No. 123,012 and Case No. 123,575) – Jeremy Johnson, Plaintiff/Appellee, vs. L.G. Martin, Defendant/Appellant, and Barry Tucker, Kristy Bryant, Special Administrator of the Estate of James Bryant, deceased, Michael Downey, Chuck Webster, Shannon Smith, and Matt Haley, Third-Party Defendants/Appellees. Proceeding to review an Order of the District Court of Seminole County, Hon. Trisha D. Smith, Trial Judge. L.G. Martin appeals a district court order awarding attorney fees and costs to the Appellees pursuant to statute, pursuant to its inherent authority to sanction bad faith litigation conduct, and alternatively as a statutory-based sanction for pursuing frivolous or knowingly false claims or defenses. That portion of the district court’s order finding that one or more of the parties are entitled to costs, and to statutory fees pursuant to 12 O.S.2021 § 936(A), 12 O.S.2021 § 940(A), and 12 O.S.2021 § 1757, is affirmed with respect to each of the parties alleging entitlement thereto. The portions of the district court’s order: (1) finding Appellee Webster entitled to statutory fees pursuant to 23 O.S.2021 § 103; (2) awarding fees without apportionment of fee-bearing claims; and (3) awarding fees as a sanction pursuant to an exercise of its inherent authority, are reversed and remanded with instructions. The portions of the trial court’s order awarding fees as a sanction pursuant to 12 O.S.2021 § 2011.1 are vacated. AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS. Opinion from the Court of Civil Appeals, Division II by FISCHER, J.; HIXON, C.J., and WISEMAN, P.J., concur. October 9, 2026
123,385 – Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as Trustee for Securitized Asset Backed Receivables LLC Trust 2007-BR5, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-BR5, Plaintiff/Appellee, vs. Lori A. Combs aka Lori Ann Combs, Defendant/Appellant, and Spouse, if any of Lori A. Combs, John Mark Patmon and John Doe, Occupant, Additional Defendants. Proceeding to review a judgment and an order of the District Court of Oklahoma County, Hon. Sheila Stinson and Hon. Richard Ogden, Trial Judges. Lori Combs appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as Trustee for Securitized Asset Backed Receivables LLC Trust 2007-BR5, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-BR5 (Bank), and subsequent denial of her motion for new trial in this foreclosure action. Combs essentially argues the district court erred by granting the Bank summary judgment because it lacked standing and a dispute of material fact existed as to the Bank’s right to enforce the note and her default thereunder. She also argues that the district court erred by not rendering detailed findings upon granting the Bank summary judgment on her counterclaims. Last, she argues that the summary judgment should be reversed because the judge who presided over the hearing later recused from hearing her motion for new trial. We reject these claims of error and affirm both the judgment and order denying a new trial. AFFIRMED. Opinion from the Court of Civil Appeals, Division II by FISCHER, J.; HIXON, C.J., and WISEMAN, P.J., concur. October 9, 2026
Division III
Division IV
123,870 – In the Matter of O.B. and L.B., Alleged Deprived Children: Dominique Roberson and Lashanda Butler, Appellants, vs. State of Oklahoma, Appellee. Proceeding to review an Order of the District Court of Oklahoma County, Hon. Kaitlyn G. Allen, District Judge. In these consolidated appeals, Lashanda Butler and Dominique Roberson appeal the district court’s orders terminating their parental rights after a bench trial. Ms. Butler appeals from the court’s order terminating her rights as to both children involved in this case, O.B. and L.B., and Mr. Roberson appeals from the order terminating his rights as to O.B. only. Upon review, we find that Mr. Roberson did not waive his right to jury trial, and the court thus erred in proceeding to a bench trial. The order terminating Mr. Roberson’s rights as to O.B. is vacated and the case is remanded for a new trial. Ms. Butler, however, waived her right to jury trial, and we find that the court’s order terminating her parental rights was supported by sufficient evidence, reasonable efforts were made to prevent the breakup of the family, and that termination was in the children’s best interest. AFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED. Opinion from the Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV by BLACKWELL, P.J.; BARNES, J., and HUBER, J., concur. October 9, 2026