Dispositions Other Than By Published Opinion | Sept. 24, 2025

September 18, 2025

Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals

Division I

122,518 – In Re the Marriage of: Melissa Goforth, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Kenneth Goforth, Respondent/Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Cherokee County, Oklahoma. Honorable Jerry S. Moore, Trial Judge. Melissa Goforth filed a petition seeking dissolution of her marriage to Kenneth Goforth. She proposes the divorce decree should be reversed due to errors pertaining to property distribution and child support. We REVERSE the decree insofar as it does not incorporate a judge-signed child support computation form as required by 43 O.S. §120(A), and we AFFIRM the decree in all other respects. Opinion by GOREE, P.J.; SWINTON, J., and PRINCE, J., concur. September 19, 2025

123,096 – Tracy Hoffman, in her capacity as Personal Representative of the Estate of Erwin Kuntz and the Estate of Dennis Kuntz and as Trustee of the Dennis and Mary Kuntz Revocable Trust and Co-Trustee of the Dennis Kuntz Revocable Trust, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. Elliott Austin Hellwege, Ernest A. Hellwege, Jr., Virginia F. Hellwege, Brenda Alice Hellwege, Donald J. Hellwege, Defendants/Appellees. Appeal from the District Court of Kingfisher County, Oklahoma. Honorable Lance E. Schneiter, Trial Judge. Tracy Hoffman (Plaintiff/Appellant) has appealed the trial court’s grant of Summary Judgment, arguing the trial court erred in finding that her Quiet Title action was time-barred by 12 O.S. § 93(4)’s 15-year statute of limitation for recovery of real property. Hoffman claimed that a 1966 conveyance of real property from Erwin and Frances Kuntz (Hoffman’s predecessors in interest) to Ernest A. Hellwege, Sr., and Florence Hellwege was fraudulent due to an allegedly forged deed. Hoffman maintained she discovered the alleged forgery in 2018 and, accordingly, initiated the underlying action within the applicable statute of limitations. The trial court determined, however, that Hoffman’s predecessors had been on constructive notice of the 1966 Deed, thus rendering her claims untimely per 12 O.S. § 93(4) and granted the Hellweges’ Motion for Summary Judgment. Opinion by PRINCE, J.; GOREE, P.J., and SWINTON, J., concur. September 19, 2025

Division II

122,998 — Christopher Stark Allen, Plaintiff/Appellant, vs. Mullins Mullins Sexton & Reaves, P.C.; Tracey D. Mullins; Maggie Lanier; Michael L. Mullins; and Jamie K. Sexton, Defendants/Appellees. Appeal from the District Court of Oklahoma County, Honorable Anthony Bonner, Trial Judge. Christopher Stark Allen appeals the trial court’s dismissal of his legal malpractice lawsuit against Defendantsx as untimely for failure to file the action within the two-year statute of limitations. The question raised is whether the trial court correctly determined as a matter of law that Allen’s lawsuit was untimely. After de novo review, we conclude the trial court erred in dismissing the action based on the statute of limitations. We reverse and remand for further proceedings. REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division II, by WISEMAN, P.J.; FISCHER, J., and BLACKWELL, J., concur. September 23, 2025

Division III

123,082 – In the Matter of: S.S.G., S.E.F., S.B.F., T.R.W. and T.B.W., Deprived Children, Misty Poafpybitty, Appellant, v. State of Oklahoma, Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Cherokee County, Oklahoma. Honorable Jerry S. Moore, Trial Judge. Misty Poafpybitty (Mother) appeals the trial court’s order filed on April 9, 2025 terminating her parental rights as to S.S.G, S.E.F., S.B.F., T.R.W., and T.B.W. We have reviewed the record and applicable law and are not persuaded by Mother’s arguments. Opinion by DOWNING, P.J.; BELL, C.J., and MITCHELL, J., concur. Sept. 17, 2025

123,100 – Portofino’s Italian Restaurant II, LLC and Indrit Vucaj, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. BHP Properties, LLC, Defendant/Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Oklahoma County, Oklahoma. Honorable Natalie Mai, Trial Judge. In this action for breach of a commercial lease and unjust enrichment, Plaintiffs/Appellants, Portofino’s Italian Restaurant II, LLC and Indrit Vucaj (jointly Tenant), appeal from the district court’s journal entry granting summary judgment in favor of Defendant/Appellee, BHP Properties, LLC. (Landlord). Tenant filed suit against Landlord seeking the return of the security deposit and first month’s rent paid by Tenant under a lease and other damages. The district court found there was no dispute as to any issue of material fact; that Tenant’s email notice to Landlord – canceling the lease due to Landlord’s breach – was ineffective; and that Landlord was entitled to judgment on Tenant’s claims as a matter of law. In accordance with Osprey L.L.C. v. Kelly-Moore Paint Co. Inc., 1999 OK 50, 984 P.2d 194, this Court holds Tenant’s email was an effective mode of delivery of notice under the lease; therefore, the trial court’s ruling to the contrary is reversed. This Court further holds summary judgment was improvidently granted because disputed questions of material fact exist as to whether Tenant’s email constituted written notice of Tenant’s intent to cancel the lease due to Landlord’s breach, and whether Tenant gave Landlord an opportunity to cure its alleged breach prior to cancelation of the lease. The trial court’s journal entry in favor of Landlord is reversed and remanded for further proceedings. Opinion by BELL, C.J.; MITCHELL, J., and GOREE, J. (sitting by designation), concur. Sept. 17, 2025

122,254 – Speake Land Holdings, LLC, Plaintiff/Appellee, Lenora A. Colbert, Kimberly Brown, Melvin J. Stevenson, Pamela Shannon, Haile Shannon, Henry Shannon, Jr., Kiawana Lampkin, Phyllis Shannon, Rhonda Kimbel, Salina Shannon, Samantha Shannon, and Sammy Shannon, III, Defendants/Appellants, and The Unknown Heirs, Executors, Administrators, Devisees, Trustees and Assigns of Henry Shannon, now) deceased, The Unknown Heirs, Executors, Administrators, Devisees, Trustees and Assigns of Hailey CelesterShannon, now deceased, The Unknown Heirs, Executors, Administrators, Devisees, Trustees and Assigns of Memory Shannon, a/k/a Memory Shannon Jackson, now deceased, The Unknown Heirs, Executors, Administrators, Devisees, Trustees and Assigns of Elwood Shannon, now deceased, Cewilla Shannon, if living, and if deceased, The Unknown Heirs, Executors, Administrators, Devisees, Trustees and Assigns of CewillaShannon, Milton Shannon, if living, and if deceased, The Unknown Heirs, Executors, Administrators, Devisees, Trustees and Assigns of Milton Shannon, Elwood Shannon, Jr., if living, and if deceased, The Unknown Heirs, Executors, Administrators, Devisees, Trustees and Assigns of Elwood Shannon, Jr., The Unknown Heirs, Executors, Administrators, Devisees, Trustees and Assigns of Edgar Franklin, Jr., now deceased, The Unknown Heirs, Executors, Administrators, Devisees, Trustees and Assigns of MccellanStevenson, a/k/a Mccllan Stevenson a/k/a Samuel MccellanStevenson, now deceased, Reginald J. Franklin, Randall J. Franklin, Dwight Franklin, The Unknown Heirs, Executors, Administrators, Devisees, Trustees and Assigns of Russell Lee Franklin a/k/a Russell L. Franklin a/k/a Russell Franklin, now deceased, The Unknown Heirs, Executors, Administrators, Devisees, Trustees and Assigns of Lena Mae Franklin a/k/a Lena Franklin a/k/a Lena Mae Tease, now deceased, The Unknown Heirs, Executors, Administrators, Devisees, Trustees and Assigns of Barbara Ann Franklin White s/p/a Barbra White a/k/a Barbara White formerly Smith f/k/a Barbara Ann Franklin, now deceased, Olan Franklin, Finis Jones f/k/a Finis Seals, Sammy Arnell Shannon, now deceased, The Unknown Heirs, Executors, Administrators, Devisees, Trustees and Assigns of Shirley Mae Thompson a/k/a Shirley Thompson, now deceased, The Unknown Heirs, Executors, Administrators, Devisees, Trustees and Assigns of Travis Stevenson, now deceased, The Unknown Heirs, Executors, Administrators, Devisees, Trustees and Assigns of Isaac Stevenson a/k/a Isaac David Stevenson, sr., now deceased, Defendants. Appeal from the District Court of Carter County, Oklahoma. Honorable Dennis Morris, Trial Judge. Plaintiff/Appellee Speake Land Holdings, LLC (Speake) sought to partition real property in Carter County, Oklahoma. Defendants/Appellants Lenora A. Colbert, Kimberly Brown, Melvin J. Stevenson, Pamela Shannon, Haile Shannon, Henry Shannon, Jr., Kiawana Lampkin, Phyllis Shannon, Rhonda Kimbel, Salina Shannon, Samantha Shannon, and Sammy Shannon, III (collectively, the Shannon Heirs) challenged the trial court’s decision to confirm the commissioners’ report. In an opinion dated June 27, 2025, we found the court’s decision was not against the clear weight of the evidence or contrary to law and affirmed. Both Speake and the Shannon Heirs filed motions for appellate attorney fees pursuant to 12 O.S. 2021 §696.4(C) and 12 O.S. 2021 §1515. We grant both motions and remand with instructions for the trial court to determine “the costs, attorney’s fees and expenses” that have accrued in this action and to “apportion the same among the parties, according to their respective interests[.]” See §1515. Opinion by MITCHELL, J.; BELL, C.J., and DOWNING, P.J., concur. September 17, 2025

122,569 – Memorial Apartments Tulsa, L.L.C., Plaintiff/Appellee, v. Alecia Addison, Defendant/Appellant. Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Honorable Tammy Bruce, Trial Judge. In this forcible entry and detainer (FED) action, Defendant/Appellant, Alecia Addison (Tenant), appeals from the trial court’s judgment in favor of Plaintiff/Appellee, Memorial Apartments Tulsa, L.L.C. (Landlord). Tenant appealed the decision and also filed an emergency motion to stay enforcement of the judgment. The Oklahoma Supreme Court granted Tenant relief and directed the trial court to conduct a hearing to set bond and rent in accordance with 12 O.S. 2021 §1148.10A(F). The judgment was to be stayed for two (2) days after the date the bond and rent were set. The trial court thereafter conducted a hearing and set the bond and rent requirements. Tenant was directed to pay her October rent to the Tulsa County Court Clerk’s office within two (2) days of the hearing. She failed to make the October rent payment. At that time, Tenant’s appeal was pending and she remained in possession of her apartment. On Landlord’s motion, we dismiss Tenant’s appeal pursuant to §1148.10A(F). Because Tenant failed to pay her then-current October rent as ordered by the trial court, she has, as a matter of law, abandoned her appeal. APPEAL DISMISSED. Opinion by BELL, C.J.; DOWNING, P.J., and MITCHELL, J., concur. September 19, 2025

123,011 – Joshua Lee Smith, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. State of Oklahoma, Ex Rel., Service Oklahoma, Defendant/Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Honorable Shannon Taylor, Trial Judge. Plaintiff/Appellant, Joshua Lee Smith, appeals from the district court’s final order sustaining the revocation of his driver’s license. Plaintiff was arrested at the Tulsa International Airport for being in actual physical control of a motor vehicle while under the influence. Plaintiff agreed to several breath tests; however, due to malfunctioning equipment, the district court ruled the tests invalid. Defendant/Appellee, State of Oklahoma ex rel. Service Oklahoma (State), revoked Plaintiff’s driver’s license. Plaintiff contends the district court erroneously followed 47 O.S. Supp. 2023 §753 which provides for the revocation of a driver’s license based upon a refusal to take a test because Plaintiff took all tests offered. Plaintiff also argues the district court erred when it sustained the revocation under 47 O.S. 2021 §757 – based on other competent evidence of intoxication – because this provision is inapplicable to a refusal case. Section 757 provides: “The provisions of Sections 751 through 761 of this title do not limit the introduction of any other competent evidence bearing on the question of whether the person was under the influence of alcohol or any other intoxicating substance, or the combined influence of alcohol and any other intoxicating substance.” Pursuant to Couch v. State ex rel. Dep’t of Pub. Safety, 2025 OK 26, 567 P.3d 1022, this Court holds Plaintiff’s driver’s license may be revoked in the absence of a valid test result, even though Plaintiff did not refuse testing and when the district court’s decision is based on §757’s “other competent evidence of intoxication.” The district court’s final order is AFFIRMED. Opinion by BELL, C.J.; DOWNING, P.J., and MITCHELL, J., concur. September 19, 2025

122,574 – Jeffery Charles Foust, Plaintiff/Appellee, v. William Sanders, Defendant/Appellant. Appeal from the District Court of Seminole County, Oklahoma. Honorable Christopher G. Anderson, Trial Judge. Appellant, William Sanders (Sanders), appeals the trial court’s denial of his Motion to Vacate the Order of Protection entered on June 4, 2024, for the benefit of Jeffery Charles Foust (Jeffery). After a thorough review of the record and the law, this Court REVERSES AND REMANDS to the trial court for a hearing consistent with this Opinion. Opinion by DOWNING, P.J.; BELL, C.J., and MITCHELL, J., concur. September 19, 2025

122,575 – Kimberly Raye Foust, Plaintiff/Appellee, v. William Sanders, Defendant/Appellant. Appeal from the District Court of Seminole County, Oklahoma. Honorable Christopher G. Anderson, Trial Judge. Appellant, William Sanders (Sanders), appeals the trial court’s denial of his Motion to Vacate the Order of Protection entered on June 4, 2024, for the benefit of Kimberly Raye Foust (Kimberly). After a thorough review of the record and the law, this Court REVERSES AND REMANDS to the trial court for a hearing consistent with this Opinion. Opinion by DOWNING, P.J.; BELL, C.J., and MITCHELL, J., concur. September 19, 2025

123,288 – Alecia Addison, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. Memorial Apartments Tulsa, L.L.C., Defendant/Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. Honorable William D. LaFortune, Trial Judge. Plaintiff/Appellant, Alecia Addison (Tenant), appeals from the trial court’s dismissal of her action against Defendant/Appellee, Memorial Apartments Tulsa, L.L.C. (Landlord), for allegations arising from Tenant’s occupancy of an apartment she rented in Landlord’s complex. Landlord filed a forcible entry and detainer (FED) action in small claims court against Tenant seeking back rent and Tenant’s eviction. Before the FED case was tried, Tenant filed the present action alleging Landlord’s conduct associated with her lease constituted constructive fraud, resulted in unjust enrichment and violated the Oklahoma Consumer Protection Act, 15 O.S. 2021 §751, et seq. (OCPA). Landlord later prevailed in the FED action and Tenant’s appeal of that judgment is affirmed in companion Case No. 122,569. In the present case, the trial court took judicial notice of the proceedings and pleadings in the FED action and granted Landlord’s motion to dismiss. Upon de novo review, we agree that Tenant is barred, as a matter of law, from obtaining relief on her claims. Tenant’s claims are predicated on Landlord’s alleged duties under ORLTA, which provides the exclusive remedy for the relief Tenant seeks. “A judgment in an action brought under [the FED] act shall be conclusive as to any issues adjudicated therein, . . .” 12 O.S. 2021 §1148.1. The FED action below adjudicated whether Landlord was entitled to possession and the amount of money owed by Tenant, which are central to Tenant’s claims in this case. Moreover, Tenant was required to bring her claims as compulsory counterclaims in the FED action. The rule regarding compulsory counterclaims applies to small claims actions. We also specifically reject Tenant’s invocation of the OCPA in seeking relief on her claims. ORLTA specifies the rights and limits the remedies of a tenant of residential property. AFFIRMED. Opinion by BELL, C.J.; DOWNING, P.J., and MITCHELL, J., concur. September 19, 2025

Division IV

121,853 – Ronald L. Toby, an individual, and Toby Concrete Transportation, Inc., an Oklahoma corporation, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. L.R. Toby Trucking, Inc., an Oklahoma corporation; G. Greg Hodges, an individual and as an Officer and Director of L.R. Toby Trucking, Inc.; and Sherry L. Stupka, an individual and as an Officer and Director of L.R. Toby Trucking, Inc., Defendants/Appellees, and G. Greg Hodges, an individual; and Sherry L. Stupka, an individual,Plaintiffs/Appellees, v. Ronald L. Toby, Trustee of the Virginia L. Toby Living Trust, Defendant/Appellant, and Ronald L. Toby, Trustee of the Virginia L. Toby Living Trust, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. L.R. Toby Trucking, Inc., Defendant/Appellee. Appeal from the District Court of Oklahoma County, Hon. Richard Ogden, Trial Judge. Appellants seek review of the district court’s Order granting Appellees’motion for directed verdict. The district court specified that, pursuant to a certain settlement agreement, “all parties intended to and did settle all claims between each of them and the specific language of the Settlement Agreement is controlling as to the claims of all parties, including claims to attorney fees.” It is the clear intent of the settlement agreement that any further proceedings are to be controlled by its terms and that any new issues, or issues unaddressed by the agreement, not result in further litigation. The trial consisted, in essence, of an attempt to circumvent the settlement agreement. In granting the directed verdict, we conclude the trial court did not err as a matter of law but, rather, acted in a manner consistent with the parties’ contract. AFFIRMED. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV, by BARNES, P.J.; HIXON, V.C.J., and HUBER, J., concur. Sept. 19, 2025

122,855 — Serpik-Family, Roman-Viadimirovich, et al., Plaintiffs/Appellants, vs. Lt. Victor Haro, Capt. Vincent Scott, Derek Manning, Sheriff, and Jill C Weedon, Judge, Defendants/Appellees. Appeal from the District Court of Beckham County, Hon. Justin Eilers, Trial Judge. Serpik-Family, Roman-Vladimirovich (Serpik) appeals the trial court’s dismissal of Serpik’s claims against Lieutenant Victor Haro(Haro), Captain Scott (Scott), Sheriff Derek Manning (Sheriff), and Judge Jill Weedon (collectively, “Defendants”). Serpik also appeals the trial court’s Order denying Serpik’s Demand to Reconsider Judgment Based on Manifest Injustice. Serpik asserted tort claims and also requested an injunction arising from his arrest, booking, and identification. Serpik failed to provide notice of his tort claims as a jurisdictional requirement of the GTCA in advance of filing suit. Defendants moved to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, failure to state a claim, and in Judge Weedon’s case, judicial immunity. The trial court granted Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss with prejudice. The trial court also denied Serpik’s motion to reconsider or vacate, seeking dismissal without prejudice, among other things. On review of the record and applicable law, we reverse the trial court’s denial of Serpik’s motion to vacate but affirm as modified the trial court’s orders of dismissal to reflect that Serpik’s tort claims against all Defendants are dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and Serpik’sclaims for injunction are dismissed as to all Defendants with prejudice. REVERSED IN PART, AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV, HIXON, V.C.J.; BARNES, P.J., and HUBER, J., concur. Sept. 19, 2025

123,092 – Bison Metals Technologies, LLC, Plaintiff/Appellee, vs. Ameritube, LLC, Defendant/Appellant. Appeal from the District Court of Pottawatomie County, Hon. John G. Canavan, Trial Judge. Defendant, Ameritube, LLC, appeals the district court’s Journal Entry of Final Judgment finding there is no substantial controversy as to any material fact and plaintiff, Bison Metals Technologies, LLC, is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, and thereby granting summary judgment in favor of Bison. Based on the undisputed facts, the district court correctly granted Bison’s Motion for Summary Judgment. The district court’s Journal Entry of Final Judgment filed on April 11, 2025, is affirmed. AFFIRMED. Opinion from Court of Civil Appeals, Division IV, by HUBER, J.; BARNES, P.J., and HIXON, V.C.J., concur. September 23, 2025

Posted in 2025 September, Dispositions Other Than By Published Opinion