Legal Opinion
Smicklas v. Spitz
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided October 20, 1992No. 71897, 72319 and 72585PublishedCited by 61 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KAUGER, Justice:
Three issues are presented: 1) whether a private citizen may seek abatement of a public nuisance based solely upon the violation of a municipal ordinance; 1 2) whether a jury instruction indicating that a landowner along a waterway may construct dikes, embankments or other structures to maintain, protect, and restore the property to its original condition adequately reflects Oklahoma law; 2 and 3) whether an expert witness may be impeached with sworn testimony given in a prior unrelated case. We find that: 1) A declaration that an activity is a public nuisance violating a city…
2Cases cited35 opinions
- Fuller v. OdomSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1987
- Woodall v. Chandler Material Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1986
- City of Midwest City v. HarrisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1977
- Becknell v. State Industrial CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1973
- Woolfolk v. SemrodSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1960
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by61 opinions
- Digital Design Group, Inc. v. Information Builders, Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2001
- Keating v. EdmondsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2001
- Oklahoma Ass'n for Equitable Taxation v. City of Oklahoma CitySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1995
- City of Bethany v. Public Employees Relations BoardSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1995
- McSorley v. Hertz Corp.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1994
56 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.