Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. Parker Pest Control, Inc.

I concur in today’s opinion only insofar as it holds that the contract in suit is one for “services” within the meaning of 12 O.S.1981 § 936.

I cannot accede to the court’s view, initially adopted in Wieland v. Danner Auto Supply, Inc.,1 and now reiterated here, which accords “prevailing party” status to a plaintiff who has accepted a defendant’s lump-sum offer to confess judgment under the terms of 12 O.S.1981 § 1101. The defendant’s § 1101 lump-sum offer to confess judgment in this case should be construed as alMnclusive. It doubtless represents an effort to dispose of the offeror’s entire…