Legal Opinion
City of Oklahoma City v. Pool
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided June 27, 1978No. 51045PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
IRWIN, Justice.
The single issue presented is the propriety of the trial judge’s order, affirmed by the Industrial Court en banc, charging costs of deposing claimant’s physician against petitioner, the City of Oklahoma City, hereinafter referred to as respondent. State Industrial Court Rule 13, provides:
“The cost of taking the deposition will be borne by the deposing party except where the Court finds that the objection 'o the deposing party’s medical report was dilatory or unnecessary. If the Court should so find, it may assess the cost of the deposition to the objecting party.”
Claim for…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Choctaw Portland Cement Co. v. LambSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
- Wilkerson Chevrolet, Inc. v. MackeySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1961
3Cited by1 opinion
- Blue Bell, Inc. v. SpeakmanCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2006