§Why CasetextPricing

Perry et al v. Fullerton et al

RESPONSE in Opposition re MOTION for Summary Judgment and Brief in Support exhibits

18 Cited authorities

  1. Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.

    418 U.S. 323 (1974)   Cited 3,872 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a private defamation plaintiff cannot recover punitive damages without proving actual malice

  2. Houston v. Hill

    482 U.S. 451 (1987)   Cited 1,338 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the First Amendment does not permit states to “provide the police with unfettered discretion to arrest individuals for words or conduct that annoy or offend them”

  3. Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire

    315 U.S. 568 (1942)   Cited 1,980 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the only type of language denied First Amendment protection is fighting words

  4. Gaylord Entertainment v. Thompson

    1998 OK 30 (Okla. 1998)   Cited 157 times
    Recognizing that federal case law provides a logical framework for determining the scope of the protection guaranteed by Oklahoma constitutional law.

  5. Martin v. Johnson

    1998 OK 127 (Okla. 1998)   Cited 91 times
    In Martin, the Oklahoma Supreme Court adopted the reasoning of the Tenth Circuit in Mason v. Oklahoma Turnpike Auth., 115 F.3d 1442 (10th Cir. 1997).

  6. Edmondson v. Pearce

    2004 OK 23 (Okla. 2004)   Cited 54 times

    No. 98754 March 30, 2004 APPLICATION TO ASSUME ORIGINAL JURISDICTION AND PETITION FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF. ¶ 0 Petitioners, the Oklahoma Attorney General and Governor, certain district attorneys and the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation request this Court to assume original jurisdiction to grant declaratory relief upholding the constitutionality of a statutory scheme (the Act) that outlaws cockfighting and related activities, 21 O.S.Supp. 2003 §§ 1692.1-1692.9. [21-1692.1-1692.9]. The Act passed

  7. Carswell v. Oklahoma State University

    1999 OK 102 (Okla. 1999)   Cited 45 times
    Holding that the state was estopped to argue that the 90-day notice period expired on a date prior to the expiration date it cited to the claimant

  8. DeCorte v. Robinson

    1998 OK 87 (Okla. 1998)   Cited 44 times
    Upholding a jury's finding that police officer was acting in good faith in making false arrest

  9. Tanique v. Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics

    99 P.3d 1209 (Okla. Civ. App. 2004)   Cited 28 times
    Discussing false light invasion of privacy

  10. Gonzalez v. Sessom

    137 P.3d 1245 (Okla. Civ. App. 2006)   Cited 22 times
    Listing the same elements

  11. Section 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights

    42 U.S.C. § 1983   Cited 485,423 times   688 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable any state actor who "subjects, or causes [a person] to be subjected" to a constitutional violation

  12. Section 1443.1 - Privileged communication defined - Exemption from libel

    Okla. Stat. tit. 12 § 1443.1   Cited 32 times
    Codifying privilege

  13. Section 1441 - Libel defined

    Okla. Stat. tit. 12 § 1441   Cited 24 times
    Defining libel and slander

  14. Section 698.29 - Confidentiality of information

    Okla. Stat. tit. 59 § 698.29

    A. Except as provided in subsection D of this section, the State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners and its employees, independent contractors, appointed committee members, or other agents shall keep confidential, all information obtained: 1. During an investigation of citizen complaints into allegations of violations of the Oklahoma Veterinary Practice Act, including: a. any review or investigation made to determine whether to allow an applicant to take an examination, or b. whether the Board