WILLIAMS v. BIXBY INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT

Annotate this Case

WILLIAMS v. BIXBY INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
2013 OK 51
Case Number: 110401
Decided: 06/27/2013

THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA

NOTICE: THIS OPINION HAS NOT BEEN RELEASED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE PERMANENT LAW REPORTS. UNTIL RELEASED, IT IS SUBJECT TO REVISION OR WITHDRAWAL.

RONALD RAY WILLIAMS, Plaintiff/Appellee,
v.
BIXBY INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant/Appellant.

ORDER OF SUMMARY DISPOSITION

¶1 Rule 1.201 of the Oklahoma Supreme Court Rules provides that "[i]n any case in which it appears that 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." Okla. S. Ct. Rule 1.201.

¶2 After reviewing the record in this case, THE COURT FINDS that our recent decision in Douglas v. Cox Retirement Props., 2013 OK 37, ___P.3d___, disposes of the issues in this case and prohibits an award of attorney fees to Appellant, Bixby Independent School District ("Bixby") under the School Protection Act (SPA), 70 O.S. Supp. 2009, § 6-144(A).

¶3 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the trial court's denial of attorney fees to Bixby is affirmed and the ruling of the Court of Civil Appeals, Division I, (COCA), granting such fees, is reversed. The cause is remanded for further proceedings.

DONE BY ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT IN CONFERENCE THIS 27th day of June, 2013.

/S/CHIEF JUSTICE

COLBERT, C.J., REIF, V.C.J., KAUGER, WATT, EDMONDSON, COMBS, GURICH, JJ. - Concur

TAYLOR, J. - Concurs in Result

WINCHESTER, J. - Dissents

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.