Legal Opinion
ANAGNOST v. TOMECEK
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided January 24, 2017No. Case Number: 113748PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KAUGER, J.:
¶ 1 The dispositive issue is whether the Oldahoma Citizens Participation Act (the OCPA), 12 O.S. Supp. 2014 1430 et. seq. 1 which became effective November 1, 2014, retroactively applies to the plaintiffs claims in this cause. We hold that it does not.
FACTS
¶ 2 In 2010, the Oklahoma Board of Medical Licensure and Supervision (Board) began investigating the plaintiff/appellant, Dr. Steven Anagnost (Dr. Anagnost). The Oklahoma Attorney General’s office filed a complaint before the Board against Dr.' Anagnost on June 18, 2010. The complaint alleged that the Doctor engaged in…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Cowart v. Piper Aircraft Corp.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1983
- Williams Companies v. DunkelgodSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2012
- Forest Oil Corp. v. Corporation Com'n of OklahomaSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1991
- Thomas v. Cumberland Operating Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1977
- Cole v. Silverado Foods, Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2003
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Barnett v. Hall, Estill, Hardwick, GableCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2020
- KRIMBILL v. TALARICOCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2017
- BEASON v. I. E. MILLER SERVICES, INC.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2019
- STEIDLEY v. SINGERSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2017
- THACKER v. WALTONCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2020
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.