The case involved a minor child injured when equipment fell on her at a fitness center and her father, who sought payment of medical expenses under the center's insurance policy and then sued the insurer for bad faith after an eight-month delay in payment. The trial court granted summary judgment to the insurer, and the Court of Civil Appeals affirmed. The court held that the plaintiffs, as third parties to the insurance contract, lacked standing to bring a bad faith claim because they had no contractual or statutory relationship with the insurer. It reasoned that the policy's primary purpose was to protect the insured business owner's assets, making any benefit to injured third parties under the medical payments provision merely incidental, as established in prior cases like Rednour v. JC & P Partnership.
Ronald Wallace sued his former employer, Mental Health Services of Southern Oklahoma, Inc., alleging wrongful termination in breach of an employment contract purportedly formed by the company's employee handbook. The trial court granted summary judgment to the employer, and the appellate court affirmed. The court reasoned that Oklahoma follows the at-will employment doctrine, which can only be altered by a definite employment contract, and the handbook contained only general, vague provisions without definite promises regarding termination procedures. Therefore, no contract existed, and Wallace's claim failed as a matter of law.
The case involved a contract dispute where Cunningham Lindsey Claims Management, Inc. served as a third-party administrator for the Oklahoma State Insurance Fund's workers' compensation claims under the Oklahoma Central Purchasing Act. Cunningham sued for unpaid amounts under the original $780 per claim rate for over 3,700 files, plus payments related to Murrah Building bombing claims and expert expenses, while the Fund argued the rate had been modified downward by agreement and that it had not approved the bombing work or expenses. The trial court granted partial summary judgment, reducing the per-claim rate and awarding Cunningham payment only for the bombing files and experts at the modified rate. On appeal, the court held that the Fund's Commissioner lacked authority to modify the contract without State Purchasing Director approval, as the relevant statutes did not create an exemption from the Central Purchasing Act, and affirmed the judgment except as modified by that ruling.
The case involved Bruce McKeever, who was injured in a car accident and had his driver's license revoked by the Oklahoma Department of Public Safety after a blood alcohol test at the hospital showed a level of 0.15. McKeever petitioned the district court to vacate or modify the revocation, arguing he was not arrested, lacked capacity to consent due to his injuries and possible shock or unconsciousness, and that proper procedures were not followed for the test. The trial court upheld the revocation, and the appellate court affirmed, finding competent evidence that McKeever was arrested and capable of consenting, that the trooper properly administered the implied consent advisory, and that the blood sample was drawn correctly by a registered nurse using official equipment. The court applied an objective standard to evaluate consent and refusal, noting that conflicting medical testimony on McKeever's mental state was resolved by the trial court's assessment of witnesses, and that his lack of memory did not negate the evidence of consent.
The case involved a dispute under the Oklahoma Surface Damages Act where surface owners RL and Mary Jane Sanford sued Anadarko Petroleum Corporation for commencing drilling operations on their property without first reaching an agreement or petitioning the court to appoint appraisers. The trial court granted summary judgment to the Sanfords, awarding treble damages, and the appellate court affirmed. The court interpreted the Act to require that, absent an agreement, the operator must file a petition for appraisers prior to entering the property with equipment, as indicated by the statute's language and related provisions emphasizing negotiation before operations begin. This construction aligns with the Act's goal of balancing the interests of surface owners and mineral operators.
The case involved Robert Stickney, who was terminated by Kansas City Life Insurance Company under an employment contract that allowed termination by either party with or without cause upon written notice. Stickney sued for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith, and various tort claims including intentional infliction of emotional distress, invasion of privacy, defamation, deceit, fraud, and interference with business relationships, arguing that a company memorandum created an implied requirement of just cause or modified the contract. A jury awarded him $841,000 in actual damages and $841,000 in punitive damages. The appellate court reversed the judgment, holding that the contract was for at-will employment of indefinite duration, that vague oral assurances or memoranda about performance reviews could not rebut the at-will presumption or create a contractual claim for continued employment, and that no tort liability could arise from a permissible termination. The matter was remanded solely for determination of any unpaid commissions.