Legal Opinion

Depuy v. Hoeme

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided March 15, 1989No. 67423PublishedCited by 45 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPALA, Vice Chief Justice.

The issue tendered for our decision is whether the deceased predecessor trial judge’s 1977 oral postdecree, midappeal directives — specifying the work required to satisfy the command of a previously issued mandatory injunction — had res judicata effect in the instant enforcement proceeding before the successor judge. Disposition of this question requires that we initially focus on the previous midappeal enforcement directives. Because no journal entry was ever prepared of this 1977 judicial ruling whose unmemorialized terms vitally affect the inquiry into issues…

2Cases cited52 opinions

  1. Allen v. McCurrySupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  2. Chamberlin v. ChamberlinSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1986
  3. Timmons v. Royal Globe Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1985
  4. Wells v. ShriverSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1921
  5. Veiser v. ArmstrongSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1984

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

3Cited by45 opinions

  1. Nealis v. BairdSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1999
  2. Panama Processes, S.A. v. Cities Service Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1990
  3. LCR, INC. v. Linwood PropertiesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1996
  4. Stites v. DUIT Const. Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1995
  5. National Diversified Business Services, Inc. v. Corporate Financial Opportunities, Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1997

40 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