Supreme Court of Oklahoma | 2026
Decisions
ALLISON, et al. v. MCCOY-POST, et al.
2026 OK 4
Case Number: 122946
Decided: 02/03/2026
¶1 Referendum Proponents appeal the Cleveland County trial court’s order granting the Protest to the Legal Sufficiency and Signature Count of Referendum Petition 2425-1, Ordinance No. 2425-2 City of Norman, Oklahoma filed by Protestants. We affirm the trial court’s finding that the gist of Referendum Petition 2425-1 is legally insufficient.
ST. ANTHONY, et al., v. GOODWIN and the WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION
2026 OK 3
Case Number: 121192
Decided: 02/03/2026
¶1 The issue is whether ordering more than one change of treating physician per claim violated 85A O.S.Supp.2013 § 56(B) 1 of the Administrative Workers’ Compensation Act (AWCA). We hold it did not.
NONDOC MEDIA and WILLIAM W. SAVAGE III v. STATE Ex Rel. BOARD OF REGENTS of the UNIV. of OKLAHOMA
2026 OK 2
Case Number: 122808
Decided: 01/13/2026
¶0 The University of Oklahoma denied an open records request from NonDoc Media, which sought the production of two reports prepared by a law firm hired by the University to investigate personnel matters. The University denied the request citing various privileges and statutory exemptions. NonDoc filed suit against the University to compel production of the reports pursuant to the Open Records Act, 51 O.S. 2021, § 24A.1 et seq. The University moved for summary judgment which the district court granted finding the University’s cited privileges and exemptions applicable. NonDoc appealed this ruling, and this Court previously retained the matter. We find the requested reports protected from production by the attorney-client privilege.
TOBACCO SETTLEMENT ENDOWMENT TRUST FUND v. STITT, ET AL.
2026 OK 1
Case Number: 123238
Decided: 01/13/2026
OPINION
¶0 Petitioner brought this action seeking declaratory relief. We assume jurisdiction, find that HB 2783 is unconstitutional, and grant declaratory relief.
…
¶1 Petitioner, the Tobacco Settlement Endowment Trust Fund (TSET), claims that HB 2783 conflicts with the constitutional requirements for appointment of TSET’s Board of Directors.This case does not concern the general limits of legislative authority, nor does it speak to whether existing statutory provisions for removal of officers do or do not apply to TSET directors. The only issue before us is the narrow constitutional question: does the amended statute, as written, violate the Oklahoma Constitution? We find that it does and grant declaratory relief.