2016 Oklahoma Statutes
Title 12. Civil Procedure
§12-684. Dismissal of case – With and without order of court.

A. An action may be dismissed by the plaintiff without an order of court by filing a notice of dismissal at any time before pretrial. After the pretrial hearing, an action may only be dismissed by agreement of the parties or by the court. Unless otherwise stated in the notice of dismissal or stipulation, the dismissal is without prejudice.

B. Except as provided in subsection A of this section, an action shall not be dismissed at the plaintiff's request except upon order of the court and upon such terms and conditions as the court deems proper. If a counterclaim has been pleaded by a defendant prior to the service upon the defendant of the plaintiff's motion to dismiss, the action shall not be dismissed against the defendant's objection unless the counterclaims can remain pending for independent adjudication by the court. Unless otherwise specified in the order, a dismissal under this subsection is without prejudice.

C. For failure of the plaintiff to prosecute or to comply with the provisions of this section or any order of court, a defendant may move for dismissal of an action or of any claim against the defendant.

D. The provisions of this section apply to the dismissal of any counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party claim. A voluntary dismissal by the claimant alone pursuant to subsection A of this section shall be made before a responsive pleading is served or, if there is none, before the introduction of evidence at the trial or hearing.

If a plaintiff who has once dismissed an action in any court commences an action based upon or including the same claim against the same defendant, the court may make such order for the payment of costs of the action previously dismissed as it may deem proper and may stay the proceedings in the action until the plaintiff has complied with the order.

R.L.1910, § 5126. Amended by Laws 2004, c. 368, § 4, eff. Nov. 1, 2004; Laws 2013, 1st Ex.Sess., c. 13, § 5; Laws 2013, 1st Ex.Sess., c. 13, § 6.

NOTE: Laws 2009, c. 228, § 6 was held unconstitutional by the Oklahoma Supreme Court in the case of Douglas v. Cox Retirement Properties, Inc., 2013 OK 37, 302 P.2d 789 (Okla. 2013) and repealed by Laws 2013, 1st Ex.Sess., c. 13, § 4.