OK CIV APP ___ (2026)
Slip opinions decided 2026 — Oklahoma Civil Appeals
These decisions have not yet been assigned a bound volume and page in Oklahoma Civil Appeals. Each case lives at a name-based URL and moves to its citation URL (with a redirect) the moment the official citation is assigned.
4 opinions
- 2026 OK CIV APP 3VERTICAL EXPLORATION v. AMERICO OIL and CORPORATION COMMISSION (2026)
¶1 Appellants, Vertical Exploration, LLC, and VE Holdco, LLC, appeal from an order of the Oklahoma Corporation Commission dismissing their application to terminate or modify a previously issued unitization order. The Commission held that Oklahoma Administrative Code (OAC) 165:5-7-20(C) only allows a plan of unitization to be amended or terminated by application to the Commission if the plan does not provide for amendment or termination. Because the unitization plan at issue contains such a provision, the Commission held it was powerless to amend or terminate its prior unitization order. For the reasons set forth below, we hold the Commission retains authority over its previously issued unitization order notwithstanding the presence of an amendment/termination provision in the unitization plan. Accordingly, we reverse the Commission's order of dismissal and remand this matter for further proceedings.
- 2026 OK CIV APP 5PARKER v. VALLIANCE BANK (2026)
¶1 Appellants Phillip R. Parker, the Phillip R. Parker Revocable Trust, Ki Lynn Parker, the Ki Lynn Parker Revocable Trust, Phillip R. Parker, DDS, MS, MS, P.C.; and OLD WELL, LCC (the Parkers unless otherwise stated) appeal the judgment in favor of Valliance Bank. This case arises out of the Bank's disclosure of its customer, Greenway Park, LLC's, financial records pursuant to a subpoena issued in a separate case. The Parkers are related in various ways to Greenway Park and maintain that the Bank's production of Greenway Park's financial records was negligent, violated their rights guaranteed by the Oklahoma Financial Privacy Act, 6 O.S.2021 §§ 2201 -2208, and breached a fiduciary duty that the Bank owed to them. The Parkers were customers of the Bank, but they were not the "customer" whose records were subpoenaed. Although we find that the Bank's production of records in the absence of a certificate that the requesting party had complied with the Financial Privacy Act violated a provision of the Act, we affirm the judgment in favor of the Bank.
- 2026 OK CIV APP 7CHANTZ CANDLER v. JOHN JAMES (2026)
¶1 John James ("James") appeals the district court's July 9, 2025, Order denying his Motion to Dismiss under the Oklahoma Citizens Participation Act ("OCPA"). Chantz Candler, Chase Candler, James Benjamin Kimmel, Michelle Kimmel, Mike Jones, Patrick Smith, Linda Smith, James William Wells, Kevin Brown, and Jim Clements (collectively, "Lessees") brought suit for defamation, after James made assertions that Lessees had not been paying rent and insurance on their aircraft hangar space in a news article and on social media. In his Motion, James asserted that Lessees could not establish by clear and specific evidence a prima facie case of defamation. The district court found that Lessees met this burden and that facts were still in dispute requiring the case to proceed for a final resolution. Based on our review of the briefs and appellate record, we affirm the district court's Order.
- 2026 OK CIV APP 8BRIAN HAMLIN v. EDWARD HENRY YOB (2026)
¶1 Appellant, Brian Hamlin (Hamlin) appeals the May 6, 2024 Journal Entry of Judgment entered in favor of Appellees, Addicted Outdoors, LLC (Addicted), Steven Yob (Yob), and The Mary O'Reilly Yob Revocable Trust (Trust). After a review of the entire record and pertinent law, we reverse the punitive damages amount awarded to Addicted and remand to the trial court with instruction for the statutory cap, but affirm on all other issues before us.