Legal Opinion
Multiple Injury Trust Fund v. Coburn
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided December 6, 2016No. 115,152, No. 115,153, No. 115,154, No. 115,155PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtEdmondson, J.
¶ 1 The parties disagree on which statute controls the controversy. The Multiple Injury Trust Fund (Fund) argues 85 O.S.Supp.2005 § 30(D) controls the rights of the lawyers to an attorney’s fee. The claimants’ lawyers argue 85 O.S.Supp.2005 § 172 controls the rights of the lawyers to an attorney’s fee, and the Workers’ Compensation Court of Existing Claims agreed § 172 controlled the controversy. We agree with the Workers' Compensation Court of Existing Claims. We do not consolidate these four review proceedings, but treat them as companion cases and *631adjudicate them simultaneously by a single…
2Cases cited47 opinions
- Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Hayburn's CaseSupreme Court of the United States · 1792
- State Ex Rel. Burk v. City of Oklahoma CitySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1979
- St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co. v. Getty Oil Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1989
- Yocum v. Greenbriar Nursing HomeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2005
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- YOUNG v. STATION 27, INC.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2017
- Compsource Mut. Ins. Co. v. Oklahoma Tax CommissionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2018
- COMPSOURCE MUTUAL INSUR. CO. v. STATE ex rel. OKLA. TAX COMM. and OKLA. ASSOC. OF ELECTRIC SELF INSURERS FUND v. STATE OF OKLA. TAX COMM.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2018
- WELLS v. OKLAHOMA ROOFING & SHEET METALSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2019
- STITT v. TREATSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2024
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.