Oklahoma Supreme Court - 2020¶ 0 The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit certified a question of state law to this Court pursuant to the Revised Uniform Certification of Questions of Law Act, 20 O.S. 2011 §§ 1601 --1611.
¶1 Rule 1.21 of the Oklahoma Supreme Court Rules, Okla. Stat. tit. 12, ch. 15, app. 1, is hereby amended as shown on the attached Exhibit "A." Rule 1.21, with the amended language noted, is attached as Exhibit "B". The amended Rule will be effective July 15, 2021.
¶0 Plaintiffs/Appellants, Craig Immel, Terry Young, Herb Beattie, and Ray Pearcey (collectively, "Taxpayers"), citizens of Tulsa County, Oklahoma, seek a declaratory judgment that Defendants/Appellees, Tulsa Public Facilities Authority (TPFA) and the City of Tulsa (City), cannot sell 8.8 acres of park land to a private developer for the construction of a commercial shopping center because the land is held in a public trust expressly as a park for the people. All parties moved for summary judgment, and the trial court granted the TPFA and the City's joint motion for summary judgment as to all claims. Taxpayers appealed, and we retained the appeal. We hold (1) Taxpayers have standing; (2) the TPFA and the City cannot sell the 8.8 acres of park land to a private developer for construction of a commercial shopping center because the land is held in a public trust for the people, unless it is abandoned and/or is no longer fit for its intended use as a public park; (3) there are disputed material facts as to whether the TPFA and the City lawfully abandoned the 8.8 acres of park land; and (4) there are disputed material facts as to whether the expenditure meets the public purpose requirement under the Oklahoma Constitution. The trial court's order granting the TPFA and the City's joint motion for summary judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.
¶1 A.M.C. appeals his adjudication as a juvenile delinquent for the offense of Possession of a Firearm After Juvenile Adjudication in Oklahoma County Case No. JDL-2020-387. A.M.C. was seventeen (17) years, three (3) months and thirty (30) days old on the date he committed the offense in August of 2020. Prior to trial, he filed a motion to suppress his confession, alleging he was improperly interrogated because no parent, attorney, or other adult representative was present. The Honorable Cassandra M. Williams denied his motion to suppress and a jury found him guilty and adjudicated him delinquent. He raises three propositions of error challenging his adjudication:
¶1 Appellant, Eric Rayman Williams, was tried and convicted by a jury in the District Court of Oklahoma County, Case No. CF-2016-8211, of two counts of Indecent or Lewd Acts With a Child Under Sixteen, in violation of 21 O.S.Supp.2013 & 2015, § 1123 . The jury recommended sentences of thirty-five years imprisonment on Count 1 and thirty years imprisonment on Count 2. The Honorable Ray C. Elliott, District Judge, sentenced Williams in accordance with the jury's verdicts and ordered the sentences to run concurrently. Judge Elliott also ordered credit for time served. Appellant must serve 85% of his sentences before becoming eligible for parole. 21 O.S.Supp.2015, § 13.1 .
¶1 On July 16, 2016, Appellant Pedro Pablo Fuentes was stopped by police while driving on Interstate 40 at Morgan Road in Canadian County. He later testified that he was fully aware of the nearly ten pounds of methamphetamine hidden in his car as he drove back from Phoenix, Arizona. He was not fully aware that for the past six weeks he had been under investigation for drug trafficking, and that for the past four weeks his every vehicular movement had been monitored by law enforcement via an electronic tracking device affixed to his car pursuant to a court order. Fuentes was charged in the District Court of Canadian County with Aggravated Trafficking in Illegal Drugs After Former Conviction of Two or More Felonies in violation of 63 O.S.Supp.2015, § 2-415 1 in case number CF-2016-560. The Honorable Jack D. McCurdy, II, District Judge, presided over his non-jury trial, found him guilty, and sentenced him to thirty-five years imprisonment and a $50,000.00 fine. The sole issue on appeal is:
¶1 Warren Cook appeals summary judgment granted in favor of McGraw Davisson Stewart, LLC ("McGraw") and Jean Lewis (Lewis, or collectively "Defendants"), on his negligence claim, and denial of Cook's Combined Motion to Reconsider and Vacate Order, which we treat as a Motion for New Trial. 1 The appeal was assigned to the accelerated docket pursuant to Oklahoma Supreme Court Rule 1.36, 12 O.S. Supp. 2019, ch.15, app.1, without further briefing.
¶1 Daniel Littleton appeals a trial court judgment in favor of Kevin Cross on his claim for diminution in the value of his vehicle. The issues on appeal are (1) whether the trial court erred in allowing expert testimony in this small claims action and (2) whether Cross's claim for diminished value to his vehicle is supported by the evidence. After review, we conclude the trial court did not err in allowing expert witness testimony and that sufficient evidence supported Cross's claim for the damages awarded, and we affirm the trial court's decision.
¶1 Respondents/Appellants Grant County Assessor and Grant County Board of Equalization (collectively, County) appeal summary judgment granted to Petitioner/Appellee Missouri Gas Energy (MGE) in its challenge to the assessment of tax on natural gas temporarily stored in Grant County. This case was previously remanded to the trial court with directions to determine the amount of gas exempt from ad valorem tax under the Freeport Exemption. The record shows no dispute of the material facts that the amount claimed by MGE as being exempt was purchased outside Oklahoma, stored in Oklahoma for nine months or less, and sold outside Oklahoma. MGE was entitled to judgment as matter of law and we affirm.
Governor Stitt has announced that longtime jurist, Judge Dana Kuehn of Tulsa, has been appointed to the Oklahoma Supreme Court. Judge Kuehn is the governor’s third appointment to the state’s highest court. When she fills the vacancy created by the retirement of Justice Tom Colbert, Kuehn will become only the fourth woman to serve on the Oklahoma Supreme Court. For the first time in state history, three women will be serving as justices at the same time when Justice-select Kuehn joins Justice Yvonne Kauger and Justice Noma Gurich among the nine members of the Supreme Court.
At the time of her selection by Governor Stitt, Judge Kuehn was serving as the Presiding Judge of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals, a position she has held since January, 2021. A member of the OCCA since 2017, Kuehn served as Vice Presiding Judge from 2018-2020. Kuehn is an active member of the Oklahoma Judicial Conference and has been serving as Appellate Judge Vice President for the OJC Executive Board. Prior to serving on the Court of Criminal Appeals, Kuehn was the Associate District Judge in Tulsa County from 2006-2017. Kuehn’s career includes experience as a private practice attorney and as a Tulsa County Assistant District Attorney.
Kuehn received her Juris Doctor from the University of Tulsa College of Law and her Bachelor of Arts in Political Science from Oklahoma State University. She has been an active member in her Tulsa community and has served on committees for the Oklahoma and Tulsa County Bar Associations. She is a strong supporter of the University of Tulsa College of Law and active with its Alumni Board. She attends First Presbyterian Church in Tulsa with her husband, Patrick, and four children.
Chief Justice Richard Darby has indicated that a formal ceremonial celebration for Justice-select Kuehn will be held at a later date.
The Sovereignty Symposium has been scheduled for October 11-12, 2021 at the Skirvin Hotel. The agenda is available.
The Judicial Nominating Commission (JNC) today announced the three nominees for the position of District Judge in Oklahoma County, Seventh Judicial District, Office 2, a vacancy created by the appointment of the Honorable Thomas E. Prince to the Court of Civil Appeals. After concluding the review process and conducting interviews, the JNC submitted the following nominees for this position to the Governor:
Under Article 7B Section 4 of the Oklahoma Constitution, the Governor has sixty days to appoint one of the nominees to this judicial position. If he fails to do so within sixty days, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court shall make the appointments.