Dispositions Other Than By Published Opinion | Sept. 18, 2024
Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals
Division I
Division II
Division III
121,368 – Dustin Coffey and Kaci Coffey, Husband and Wife, Plaintiffs/Appellees, v. Katy Lyons, Defendant/Appellant, and Allen Lyons, et al., Defendants. Appeal from the District Court of Latimer County, Oklahoma. Honorable Margaret Nicholson, Trial Judge. In this quiet title action, Defendant/Appellant, Allen Lyons, via the personal representative of his estate, seeks review of the district court’s May 16, 2023 Journal Entry of Judgment. The judgment stated mutual mistake of fact existed with respect to the 2006 deed conveying property from Plaintiff/Appellee/Dustin Coffey to Allen Lyons. The district court found reformation of the deed was warranted, reforming the deed into a lease. The district court found Dustin and Kacie Coffey were the joint tenants of the parcel of land and Allen Lyons was deemed to be a previous lessee of the property, but not an owner by deed. We find the deed could not be reformed into a lease and the statute of limitations expired before Plaintiffs/Appellees filed the quiet title action. The order of the district court is REVERSED and this cause is REMANDED to the district court. Opinion by GOREE, J.; MITCHELL, P.J., and DOWNING, J., concur. September 13, 2024
121,801 – In re the Matter of: A.E., A.K., S.K., E.K., & B.K., Alleged Deprived Children, Nicholas Kosyan, Appellant, v. State of Oklahoma, Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Comanche County, Oklahoma. Honorable Lisa Shaw, Trial Judge. At issue is whether Oklahoma law permits a trial court to impose a modified individualized service plan aimed at correcting conditions for which the State of Oklahoma sought-and a jury denied-termination of a father’s parental rights. We hold the State of Oklahoma is precluded from seeking the termination of the father’s parental rights on the same grounds asserted at the original trial without new or different evidence, however, the court, through its continued jurisdiction over the children, has authority to impose additional requirements on the father to correct the conditions which led to the children’s deprived adjudication. We find no abuse of discretion in the court’s order and AFFIRM. Opinion by MITCHELL, P.J.; GOREE, J., and DOWNING, J., concur. September 13, 2024
121,972 – In the Matter of the Adoption of: L.J.T., a minor child, Houston Foster, Respondent/Appellant, v. Dillon Price, Petitioner/Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Honorable Kurt G. Glassco, Trial Judge. Appellant, Houston Foster (Father) appeals the trial court’s Order and Journal Entry of January 11, 2024 AWOC Hearing (Order) finding L.J.T. eligible for adoption without Father’s consent. The trial court found Petitioner, Dillon Price (Stepfather) met his burden on two of the three grounds pled, namely 10 O.S.2021, §§ 7505.42(B) and (H). After a review of the record, we AFFIRM. Opinion by DOWNING, J.; MITCHELL, P.J., concurs and GOREE, J., dissents. September 13, 2024
Division IV
120,647 – In re the Marriage of: Mark e. McDowell, Petitioner/Appellee, vs. Stacy McDowell, Respondent/Appellant. Appeal from an Order of the District Court of Canadian County, Hon. Barbara Hatfield, Trial Judge. Appellant, Stacy McDowell, appeals various legal rulings of the trial court, including its decision to award her $100,000 in support alimony payable at a rate of $3,000 a month. Upon review, we find that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in either the alimony award or its other legal rulings and thereby affirm. AFFIRMED. Opinion from the Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV by BLACKWELL, J.; HUBER, P.J., and HIXON, J., concur. September 12, 2024