Oklahoma Civil Procedure

Friday, September 29, 2017

Equitable division of contingent fee upheld; Burk factors did not apply

http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=481569

Posted by Jim Milton at 10:25 AM
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Newer Post Older Post Home

About Me

Jim Milton
View my complete profile

Popular Posts

  • Commentary on the BNSF decision
    Follow the link for excellent commentary on the BNSF decision on general jurisdiction. http://journalrecord.com/2017/06/14/gavel-to-gavel-l...
  • Legislative update, 2018 Oklahoma session
    Here are quick updates on Title 12 bills before the Oklahoma legislature: SB1550 would appear to create a new procedure for attacking a ju...
  • Procedure for attorney disqualification must be followed
    In Mitts v. Stamps , 2015 OK CIV APP 7 , the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals held that the trial court must follow the prescribed procedure ...
  • Summary judgment and 12 O.S. 2056
    Below is a link to a decision of the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals, along with a link to yesterday’s order by the Oklahoma Supreme Court...
  • Two interesting cases on juror bias and standard of review on appeal
    In Fields v. Saunders, 2012 OK 17 , the Oklahoma Supreme Court held that new trial is required where juror voluntarily revealed, after verdi...
  • Thirty-day appeal time runs from date of actual notice where court file contains no proof of compliance with the three-day mailing rule
    On April 16, 2012, the Oklahoma Supreme Court reinstated an appeal where the record showed that the appeal was initiated within 30 days of...
  • New Oklahoma court rule dealing with audio recordings of court proceedings with non-certified foreign language interpreters
    Today, the Supreme Court adopted Rule 1.410, concerning audio recording of proceedings with non-certified foreign language interpreters.  ht...
  • The Court's decision on the Ten Commandments
    The Court's decision on the Ten Commandments is now available for download on the Court's docket.  The main decision was entered on ...
  • Section 3009.1 of the Oklahoma Evidence Code upheld in face of constitutional challenge
    Notable decision.   http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=479345
  • Lodestar findings
    "If a trial court enhances or reduces the lodestar when assessing attorney fees, the court should include its specific reasons in the j...

Labels

  • Attorney Disqualification (1)
  • Discovery Masters (1)
  • Due Process (1)
  • Judicial Nominating Commission (1)
  • Juries (1)
  • Legislation (2)
  • Notice (1)
  • Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals (3)
  • Oklahoma Discovery Code (1)
  • Oklahoma Supreme Court (4)
  • Social Media (2)
  • Summary Judgment (1)
  • Technology in the Courtroom (1)
  • Videoconferencing (1)

Crucial links

  • Full text of the Oklahoma Constitution
  • Single Subject Rule (and Reenactment Rule)
  • Douglas v. Cox Retirement Properties, Inc.
  • Title 12, Oklahoma Statutes
  • Oklahoma Supreme Court Rules
  • Rules for District Courts in Oklahoma
  • Local District Court Rules

Blog Archive

  • ►  2020 (1)
    • ►  August (1)
  • ►  2019 (2)
    • ►  October (2)
  • ►  2018 (4)
    • ►  July (2)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  February (1)
  • ▼  2017 (6)
    • ▼  September (2)
      • Equitable division of contingent fee upheld; Burk ...
      • Summary judgment reversed in collections case wher...
    • ►  June (3)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2016 (7)
    • ►  November (3)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  September (2)
    • ►  March (1)
  • ►  2015 (5)
    • ►  July (2)
    • ►  May (1)
    • ►  January (2)
  • ►  2014 (7)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  May (2)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (2)
  • ►  2013 (11)
    • ►  October (2)
    • ►  September (3)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  February (1)
    • ►  January (2)
  • ►  2012 (8)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  March (2)
This Blog is made available by James C. Milton for educational purposes only as well as to give you general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. By using this blog site you understand that there is no attorney client relationship between you and the Blog publisher. The Blog should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.
Picture Window theme. Powered by Blogger.