Legal Opinion
Rogers v. QuikTrip Corp.
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided March 8, 2010No. 106,684PublishedCited by 84 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtOpala, J.
¶ 1 Two questions are pressed for review: (1) Did the trial judge err when he ruled that he had jurisdiction over this cause? and (2) Did the trial judge err when he ruled the defendants had a duty to disclose the presence of fuel additives in the gasoline offered for sale? We answer the first in the negative and latter in the affirmative.
I
THE ANATOMY OF LITIGATION
tí 2 In May 2008 Mark Rogers, Terry O’Rorke, and William Wilson (plaintiffs) brought a putative class action against Quik-trip Corporation, Love’s Travel Stops and Country Stores, Inc., and 7-Eleven, L.L.C., (collectively called…
2Cases cited34 opinions
- Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- BMW of North America, Inc. v. GoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- TRW/Reda Pump v. BrewingtonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1992
- TXO Production Corp. v. Oklahoma Corp. CommissionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1992
- Nealis v. BairdSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1999
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by84 opinions
- TORRES v. SEABOARD FOODS, LLCSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2016
- IN RE: INITIATIVE PETITION NO. 397, STATE QUESTION NO. 767Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2014
- State ex rel. Board of Regents ex rel. Campus Disciplinary Council v. LucasSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2013
- YOUNG v. STATION 27, INC.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2017
- IN RE: INITIATIVE PETITION NO. 397, STATE QUESTION NO. 767Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2014
79 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.