Legal Opinion

Groseclose v. City of Tulsa

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided November 18, 1998No. 88,084PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHargrave, J.

¶ 1 The issue is whether the trial court erred in awarding Defendant/Appellee Steve Slaughter indemnification from the City of Tulsa for attorney fees and costs expended in defending an action in which it was alleged that he committed assault and battery on the plaintiff while acting within the scope of his employment as a Tulsa police officer. We find that the trial court did not err in allowing indemnification.

¶ 2 Defendant Slaughter was off duty and had just attended church services when he confronted Plaintiff Groseclose and two associates while they were removing items from a warehouse…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Mock v. StricklinSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1957
  2. McCormack v. Town of GraniteSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1995

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Steltzlen v. FritzSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2006
  2. Cattlemen's Steakhouse, Inc. v. WaldenvilleSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2013
  3. Lampkin v. LittleCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2002
  4. Marriage of Smith v. VillarealSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2012
  5. MARIANI v. STATE ex rel. OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITYSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2015

7 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