Towne v. Hubbard

Annotate this Case

Towne v. Hubbard
1999 OK 10
977 P.2d 1084
70 OBJ 592
Case Number: 92412
Decided: 02/16/1999
Mandate Issued: 03/25/1999
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Fern Alice TOWNE, Petitioner,
v.
Carol Ann HUBBARD, Honorable Judge of the District Court of Oklahoma County, 7th Judicial District, Respondent.

[977 P.2d 1085]
ORDER

¶1 On consideration of the paperwork on file, the court finds, concludes and orders that:

(1) petitioner seeks corrective relief from a January 5, 1999 order, entered in Cause No. PG-98-570, on the docket of the District Court in Oklahoma County, by which petitioner's lawyer, Harley E. Venters, Esq., was removed as her counsel of record and replaced by another legal practitioner of the trial judge's selection and appointment.

¶2 (2) an order removing a party's counsel (upon disqualification or for other reasons) may be reviewed on appeal brought by the client.

¶3 (3) appealability of a guardianship (or probate) order is governed generally by the provisions of

¶4 (4) the January 5, 1999 guardianship order, from which relief is sought herein by a prerogative writ that is to be granted in the exercise of this court's original jurisdiction, constitutes an appealable interlocutory guardianship decision.

¶5 (5) a party's quest for a prerogative writ may be recast as an appeal when the original proceeding was brought here within the statutory time to invoke this court's reviewing cognizance. Prock v. Dist. Court of Pittsburg County,

¶6 (6) this original proceeding, which challenges an appealable interlocutory order in guardianship, is hereby recast as a timely appeal. Petitioner is designated as appellant and this cause shall be styled: In the Matter of the Guardianship of Fern Alice Towne. All the real parties in interest who are appearing herein are designated appellees.

¶7 (7) this appeal shall henceforth proceed in accordance with an accelerated schedule. Within twenty (20) days of this order's date, appellant shall file a petition in error and a record for an accelerated appeal. Both documents shall conform to

¶8 (8) the briefs now on file shall be considered as briefs on appeal. Because this cause stands recast sans advance notice, any party may file an additional brief, Okla. Sup. Ct. R. 1.36(g), no later than fifteen (15) days of the day appellees file their responses to the petition in error. No answer or reply briefs may be offered without prior leave of court.

¶9 [977 P.2d 1085] (9) this cause is retained sua sponte for disposition. Okla. Sup. Ct. R. 1.24(a).

SUMMERS, C.J., HARGRAVE, V.C.J., OPALA, WILSON, WATT, J.J., concurring; HODGES and LAVENDER, J.J., not voting; SIMMS, J., dissents; Kauger, J., absent.

 

 

 

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.