Legal Opinion

Baylis v. City of Tulsa

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided June 13, 1989No. 64832PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SUMMERS, Justice.

The lone controlling question is whether plaintiff/appellee police officers and firefighters who seek judgment against the City of Tulsa (city) for money due under a contract clause requiring the city to give reclassified employees a five percent pay raise must comply with the provisions of 62 O.S.1981 §§ 362 and 363 in order for the judgment to be valid. We hold that they must. Because plaintiffs presented no evidence at trial to satisfy these provisions, the judgment of the trial court is void for want of jurisdiction.

*687All of the plaintiffs hold supervisory or managerial…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Cate v. Archon Oil Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1985
  2. Smart v. Board of County Com'rs of Craig CountySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1917
  3. La Bellman v. Gleason & Sanders, Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1966
  4. Protest of Kansas City Southern Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1932
  5. Valley Vista Development Corp. v. City of Broken ArrowSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1988

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. HALL v. THE GEO GROUP, INCSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2014
  2. Stites v. DUIT Const. Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1995
  3. Red Rock Mental Health v. RobertsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1997
  4. City of Del City v. Fraternal Order of Police, Lodge No. 114Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1993
  5. Clay v. Independent School District No. 1 of Tulsa CountySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1997

13 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