Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Marriage of Hamm v. Hamm

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided April 28, 2015No. 113,451Published

1Concurrence

COMBS, V.C.J.,

with whom WINCHESTER, J., joins, concurring specially:

1 1 While I agree with the majority's decision that Petitioner's appeal should be dismissed, I write separately to emphasize the problems inherent in dismissing Petitioner's appeal while allowing Respondent's own appeal to proceed. The majority applies what has long been the general rule in Oklahoma: a party to an action who voluntarily accepts the benefits of a judgment waives the right to appeal. Adams v. Unterkircher, 1985 OK 96, ¶ 7, 714 P.2d 193; United Engines, Inc. v. McConnell Const., Inc., 1980 OK 139, ¶ 14, 641 P.2d…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Stites v. DUIT Const. Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1995
  2. Berget v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1995
  3. Teel v. TeelSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1988
  4. McMillian v. HolcombSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1995
  5. United Engines, Inc. v. McConnell Construction, Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1981

5 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