Legal Opinion
Wilhelm v. Gray
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided February 14, 1989No. 61296PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SIMMS, Justice.
Appeal from a judgment of the district court dismissing plaintiff/appellant’s cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, because an adequate remedy under state law exists for redress of plaintiff’s claim. AFFIRMED.
The relevant facts are as follows. Plaintiff received a traffic citation. Because he failed to appear in court at the designated time, a bench warrant was issued for his arrest. Later, the plaintiff paid his fine. The warrant was recalled by the Court three days after the fine was paid.
The Court Clerk, appellee Dan Gray, failed to notify the Oklahoma County Sheriffs…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Hudson v. PalmerSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Daniels v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Parratt v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Baker v. McCollanSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Alonzo Bonner v. Joseph CoughlinCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1975
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- McLin v. TrimbleSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1990
- Harmon v. CradduckSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2012
- Cooper v. Millwood Independent School District No. 37Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1994
- CITY OF OKLAHOMA CITY v. BALKMANSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2020
- CITY OF OKLAHOMA CITY v. BALKMANSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2020
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.