Legal Opinion · Dissent

Kirschstein v. Haynes

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided January 30, 1990No. 67655Published

1Dissent

DOOLIN, Justice,

with whom KAUGER and ALMA WILSON, Justices, joins; dissenting:

The matter before us today is properly defined by the majority. If the application made to file a delayed certificate of birth under 63 O.S.1981 § 1-3131 is a judicial proceeding or “other” proceeding authorized by law as used in 12 O.S.1981, § 1443.1,2 there is little doubt that the majority correctly holds that the proceeding under 12 O.S.1981, § 1443.1 applies to quasi judicial proceedings.

To be terse and to the point, I do not believe the action or application is judicial, quasi-judicial, or any other proceeding…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. McCorkle v. Great Atlantic Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1981
  2. CRIBERG v. RaymondMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1976
  3. Green Acres Trust v. LondonArizona Supreme Court · 1984
  4. Lerette v. Dean Witter Organization, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1976
  5. Robert W. Johnston v. H. G. Cartwright, Kiowa Corporation, Walter Brown and H. G. Cartwright v. Robert W. JohnstonCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1966

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API