Dispositions Other Than By Published Opinion | Oct. 9, 2024
Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals
Division I
122,297 – Stafford Flying H, LLC, an Oklahoma Limited Liability Company, and Stafford Family Limited Partnership, an Oklahoma Limited Partnership, an Oklahoma Limited Partnership, Plaintiffs/Appellees, v. GBR Cattle Company, LLC, a/k/a GBR Cattle Company, LLC, an Oklahoma Limited Liability Company, William B. Sanders s/p/a William Brian Sanders s/p/a Brian Sanders, individually and as Manager of GBR Cattle Company, LLC, Amy L. Sanders, individually, Defendants/Appellants. Appeal from the District Court of Okfuskee County, Oklahoma. Honorable Lawrence Parish, Trial Judge. GBR Cattle Company, LLC, William B. Sanders, and Amy L. Sanders (Defendants/Appellants) (collectively “Sanders”), have appealed an Order granting a Motion for Summary Judgment in favor of Stafford Flying H, LLC and the Stafford Family Limited Partnership (Plaintiffs/Appellees). The trial court found that Stafford Flying H, LLC is the owner of the real property at issue in this case. Sanders has alleged a myriad of issues on appeal, but only two issues necessitated our resolution: (1) whether any material fact remained in controversy related to the chain of title following the 1997 conveyance; and (2) whether the trial court deprived Sanders of procedural due process when it denied a request for a courtroom interpreter. Based upon our review of the record and relevant legal authority, we find no error in the trial court’s grant of Summary Judgment, nor did we discover any deprivation of Sanders’ procedural due process rights. The trial court’s Order is, accordingly, AFFIRMED. Opinion by PRINCE, J.; BELL, V.C.J., and SWINTON, P.J., concur. October 2, 2024
121,851 – Linh Tran Stephens, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. Adam Sylvester Stephens and Foes 1 through 10, Defendants/Appellees. Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Honorable William D. LaFortune, Trial Judge. Petitioner/Appellant, Linh Tran Stephens (Wife), the former wife of Respondent/Appellee, Adam Sylvester Stephens (Husband), appeals from the trial court’s order denying Wife’s motion to reconsider; objection to order of dismissal; and demand for Article III judge. Wife filed her motion to reconsider on September 18, 2023, four (4) days before the filing of the final order granting Husband’s motion to dismiss Wife’s breach of contract lawsuit. The trial court dismissed Wife’s lawsuit against Husband pursuant to 12 O.S. 2021 §2012(B)(8) because Wife’s claims against Husband are the same claims pending in another action between the same parties. After reviewing the record on appeal, we hold Wife failed to support several allegations of error that she raises on appeal with cogent legal arguments and legal authority; therefore, Wife failed to sustain her burden of showing trial court error. We further hold Wife’s demand for an Article III judge lacks legal support because the “constraints of Article III do not apply to state courts.” ASARCO Inc. v. Kadish, 490 U.S. 605, 617, 109 S. Ct. 2037, 2045, 104 L. Ed. 2d 696 (1989). Finally, we hold the trial court properly dismissed this case pursuant to §2012(B)(8) because Wife raises the same issue and claims in the instant proceeding that she raised in a pending post‑dissolution of marriage proceeding. Because the trial court properly granted the dismissal and for the reasons above, we hold the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Wife’s motion to reconsider; objection to order of dismissal; and demand for Article III judge. AFFIRMED. Opinion by J.; BELL, V.C.J., SWINTON, P.J., and PRINCE, J., concur. October 2, 2024
121,736 – Dana Thornburg, Appellant, v. State of Oklahoma, Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Garfield County, Oklahoma. Honorable Paul K. Woodward, Trial Judge. GBR Cattle Company, Dana Thornburg (Appellant) has appealed the trial court’s denial of her Motion to Exonerate Bond, in which she sought to exonerate the surety bond posted on behalf of Defendant, Jianguo Zeng, who failed to appear at a scheduled hearing. Thornburg alleged that Zeng had been deported to China, not only delaying her efforts to locate Zeng, but making his return an impossibility of his return due to China’s extradition policies. Based thereon, Thornburg argued the existence of “good cause” pursuant to 59 O.S. § 1332, leading to her Motion to Exonerate Bond. The trial court denied Thornburg’s Motion, citing to the State’s oral objection that the bondsman “assumed the risk of bonding a foreign national,” and it is the trial court’s denial of her Motion to Exonerate Bond from which Thornburg sought appellate review. Opinion by PRINCE, J.; BELL, V.C.J., and SWINTON, P.J., concur. October 2, 2024
Division II
Division III
121,208 – In re the Marriage of Morrow: Terry J. Morrow, Petitioner/Appellee, v. Rebekah J. Morrow, Respondent/Appellant. Appeal from the District Court of Delaware County, Oklahoma. Honorable Barry V. Denney, Trial Judge. At issue is whether the trial court’s order awarding supervised visitation to a mother and awarding sole custody to a father, an adjudicated perpetrator of domestic violence, is against the clear weight of the evidence. Based on the evidence presented at trial that the mother struggles with mental and emotional instability and because the father overcame the rebuttal presumption, created by his domestic violence adjudication, that he should not have custody of the children, we hold the court’s order is not against the clear weight of the evidence and AFFIRM. Opinion by MITCHELL, P.J.; GOREE, J., and DOWNING, J., concur. October 04, 2024
121,540 – In the Matter of the Estate of Andrew Cheesten Jackson, Deceased, Jon Adams, Special Administrator of the Estate of Andrew Cheesten Jackson, Appellant, v. The Hille Foundation and Greenwood Rising, Inc., Appellees. Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Honorable Kurt G. Glassco, Trial Judge. The Hille Family Charitable Foundation and Greenwood Rising, Inc, Appellees, lacked standing to challenge the appointment of Appellant, Jon Adams, as special administrator of the Estate of Andrew Cheesten Jackson, applying Murg v. Barnsdall Nursing Home, 2005 OK 73, 123 P.3d 21. The order denying Appellant’s motion for reconsideration, functioning as a motion for new trial, is reversed. Opinion by GOREE, J.; MITCHELL, P.J., concurs and DOWNING, J., dissents. October 04, 2024
121,864 – Robin Bicksler and Kevin Bicksler, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. James Robert Carnley, Jr., Terri Sue Carnley, and Gina Kinnison, Defendants/Appellees. Appeal from the District Court of Osage County, Oklahoma. Honorable Burl Estes, Trial Judge. Plaintiffs/Appellants, Robin and Kevin Bicksler, seek review of the Osage County District Court order of November 29, 2023, denying the Bickslers’ post-trial motions, including a motion for new trial, and memorializing the district court’s order of July 19, 2023. The Bickslers filed their Petition against the three Defendants/Appellees (James and Terri Carnley and Gina Kinnison), in Osage County District Court on March 28, 2018, asking that a fraudulent and/or wrongfully obtained deed be set aside. We affirm the district court’s denial of Plaintiffs’/Appellants’ post-trial motions. AFFIRMED. Opinion by GOREE, J.; MITCHELL, P.J., and DOWNING, J., concur. October 04, 2024
122,092 – In the Matter of R.R., Alleged Deprived Child, Tara Robertson, Appellant, v. State of Oklahoma, Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Grady County, Oklahoma. Honorable Z. Joseph Young, Trial Judge. Appellant, Tara Robertson (Mother), appeals from an order following a non-jury trial terminating her parental rights from her minor child, R.R. Mother does not contest the sufficiency of the evidence of either ground for termination. Instead, Mother argues that the trial court should have granted a continuance so she could pursue private counsel or request counsel be appointed to her, that she was denied the right to an attorney under Oklahoma law, and that because she represented herself, she was denied effective assistance of counsel. Upon review of the record on appeal and applicable law, we AFFIRM. Opinion by DOWNING, J.; MITCHELL, P.J., and GOREE, J., concur. October 04, 2024
Division IV