Rowland v. City of Tulsa
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
1DissentOpala, J.
¶ 1 The court vacates today the trial tribunal’s order refusing to consider — for perceived want of jurisdiction over the § 84 approval order1 — the claimant’s post-settlement application for a fee-quantum inquiry. It remands the claimant’s request with directions to grant a hearing. While I do not recede from the court’s ultimate disposition of the cause by today’s remand, I write in dissent to afford the Workers’ Compensation Court and its bar some insights into the underlying problem at hand and to suggest several solutions that would better secure the stability and finality of…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Hamid v. Sew OriginalSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1982
- Reherman v. Oklahoma Water Resources BoardSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1984
- Dyke v. Saint Francis Hospital, Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1993
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.