Legal Opinion
Hooper v. Clinkingbeard
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided March 16, 1993No. 77386PublishedCited by 37 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KAUGER, Justice:
Two issues 1 are presented: 1) whether the appellee, Lois L. Flowers Hooper (Hooper/adopted daughter/pretermitted heir), qualifies as a pretermitted heir under 84 O.S.1991 § 132;2 and 2) whether extrinsic evidence is admissible to demonstrate the adoptive mother’s intent. We find that: 1) The passage of the Uniform Adoption Act (Adoption Act), 10 O.S.1991 § 60.1 et seq. in 1957 abolished all pre-existing differences between adopted and natural children. Because the clear language of 10 O.S.1991 § 11323 provides that termination of parental rights does not affect a child’s…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Fuller v. OdomSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1987
- Becknell v. State Industrial CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1973
- In Re the Request of Phillips Petroleum Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1982
- Duesterhaus v. City of EdmondSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1981
- Northwest Datsun v. Oklahoma Motor Vehicle CommissionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1987
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- Keating v. EdmondsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2001
- McClure v. ConocoPhillips Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2006
- Cox v. State ex rel. Oklahoma Department of Human ServicesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2004
- King v. KingSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2005
- World Publishing Co. v. MillerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2001
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.