Legal Opinion
Dunkin v. Instaff Personnel
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided June 19, 2007No. 102,580PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtColbert, J.
1 The issue in this matter is whether the three-judge review panel of the Workers' Compensation Court was presented with an order from the trial tribunal that was suffi*1059cient to afford meaningful review of the determination that Claimant, Craig E. Dunkin, "did not sustain an accidental personal injury arising out of and in the course of [his] employment." This Court holds that the Workers' Compensation Court's finding lacked the requisite definiteness and certainty for there to have been meaningful judicial review by the three-judge panel when it determined that the trial tribunal's…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Parks v. Norman Municipal HospitalSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1984
- Owings v. Pool Well ServiceSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1992
- Corzine v. Traders CompressSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1945
- Bittman v. Boardman Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1977
- Benning v. Pennwell Publishing Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1994
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Lang v. Erlanger Tubular Corp.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2009
- Summers v. Zurich American Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2009
- GILLISPIE v. ESTES EXPRESS LINES, INC.Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2015
- Wilcoxson v. WOODWARD COUNTY EMSCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2010
- Lee v. Sundance Rehabilitation Corp.Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2012
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.