Legal Opinion
Kerr v. Clary
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided October 16, 2001No. 94,158PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWinchester, J.
I 1 The primary issue in this case is whether the Court of Civil Appeals, Division 1, erred in its conclusion that a "Motion to Reconsider" filed within ten (10) days after the trial court filed its judgment is necessarily treated as a "Motion for New Trial" based on this Court's holding in Horizons, Inc. v. Keo Leasing Co., 1984 OK 24, 681 P.2d 757. We hold that the Court of Civil Appeals, Division 1, did so err, and we reverse.
¶ 2 Appellant/Father Donavan Clary ("Clary") and Appellee/Mother Amanda Kerr ("Kerr") divorced in June 1996. By the terms of the divorcee decree filed in the District…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Horizons, Inc. v. Keo Leasing Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1984
- Shea v. SheaSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1975
- DLB Energy Corp. v. Oklahoma Corp. CommissionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1991
- Seifried v. State Ex Rel. BashSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1939
- Webber v. WebberSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936
3Cited by21 opinions
- Reeds v. WalkerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2006
- Cox Oklahoma Telecom, LLC v. State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Corp. CommissionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2007
- State Ex Rel. Serrano v. BellamyNebraska Supreme Court · 2002
- Mooney v. MooneySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2003
- D.H. v. StateSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2006
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.