IN RE OKLAHOMA ACCESS TO JUSTICE COMMISSION

2015 OK 47

Summary: This is administrative matter amends the Rules for the Oklahoma Supreme Court regarding the number of members on the Oklahoma Access to Justice Commission.

Discussion: The Oklahoma Supreme Court is acting in its administrative capacity over the court system of the State of Oklahoma.

IN THE MATTER OF THE SUSPENSION OF MEMBERS OF THE OKLAHOMA BAR ASSOCIATION

2015 OK 46

Summary: This is an administrative matter that suspends the licenses of certain attorneys for failure to meet annual dues payments for 2015.

Discussion: Because the status of an attorney's license to practice law is a public matter all such rulings are published. This is an administrative action regarding the Court’s governance of the operations of the Oklahoma court system.

IN THE MATTER OF THE SUSPENSION OF MEMBERS OF THE OKLAHOMA BAR ASSOCIATION

2015 OK 45

Summary: This is an administrative matter that suspends the licenses of certain attorneys for failure to meet continuing education requirements.

Discussion: Because the status of an attorney's license to practice law is a public matter all such rulings are published. This is an administrative action regarding the Court’s governance of the operations of the Oklahoma court system.

AMENDMENT TO RULE 16 OF RULES OF STATE BD. OF EXAMINERS OF CERTIFIED COURTROOM INTERPRETERS

2015 OK 44

Summary: This is an administrative matter amends the recently released Rules for the State Board of Examiners of Certified Courtroom Interpreters.

Discussion: The Oklahoma Supreme Court is acting in its administrative capacity over the court system of the State of Oklahoma.

ORDER AUTHORIZING ACCESS TO ELECTRONIC JURY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

2015 OK 43

Summary: This is an administrative matter that implements the Electronic Jury Management System.

Discussion: The Oklahoma Supreme Court is acting in its administrative capacity over the court system of the State of Oklahoma.

IN THE MATTER OF D.S.H.

2015 OK 42

Summary: No facts were recited in this opinion.

Legal Issues: The Court ruled, "After reviewing the record in this case, THE COURT FINDS that our decision in In the Matter of T.T.S., 2015 OK 36, ___P.3d___ involves the same primary legal questions as those in the above-styled appeal; and therefore, our holding in T.T.S. disposes of the issues herein."

Discussion: Under the rules of the Oklahoma Supreme Court, when there is a prior controlling appellate decision is dispositive of the appeal, the court may summarily affirm or reverse, citing in its order of summary disposition this rule and the controlling decision.

WHITE v. VALIR PHYSICAL THERAPY

2015 OK 41

Summary: White received physical therapy services from Valir Physical Therapy following an automobile accident. Valir then billed the insurance of the other party involved in the accident directly, rather than billing White's medical insurance. White alleged that this resulted in Valir sidestepping pricing agreements with White's medical insurance provider that would have resulted in Valir receiving a smaller billed recovery. White alleged that the net result was that Valir took a larger portion of the third-party insurance proceeds than if Valir billed White's medical insurance. Valir argued that pursuant to the Assignment of Benefits entered into by the parties that Valir had the option of obtaining payment from White's medical insurance or from the third-party insurance. Valir moved for and was granted summary judgment at the trial court.

Legal Issues: Both parties admit that the Assignment of Benefits was entered into by the parties in this case. The Court looked to the language of the Assignment of Benefits and found that ambiguities existed. In particular, the Court looked to language that required White to remit payments made directly to her on behalf of Valir and for White to make good on amounts billed to but not paid by her medical insurance provider.

The Court ruled that reasonable minds could disagree regarding the effect of the Assignment of Benefits. As such, a question of material fact existed on the contract claim. The Court remanded this action to the trial court for action consistent with its ruling.

Discussion: While White was provided the opportunity to go forward with a claim of breach of contract, concurrent claims for fraud and "tort" remain dismissed. White will have the opportunity to conduct discovery and proceed with a breach of contract claim at the trial court level.