Skip to main content

State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Wagener

OKLANovember 1, 2005No. SCBD No. 5080Cited 2 times
DismissedWagener

Case Details

Status
Published
Procedural Posture
consent decree

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

Attorney Larry Dean Wagener resigned from the Oklahoma Bar Association pending disciplinary proceedings. His name was stricken from the roll of attorneys, with a five-year minimum period before reinstatement eligibility.

What This Ruling Means

# Summary of State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Ass'n v. Wagener ## What Happened The Oklahoma Bar Association brought disciplinary action against attorney Larry Dean Wagener. The specific details of his misconduct aren't provided in this case summary, but the proceedings were serious enough that action was taken against him professionally. ## What the Court Decided Rather than face the full disciplinary process, Wagener resigned from the Oklahoma Bar Association. As a result, his name was removed from the official list of licensed attorneys. He cannot reapply for his law license for at least five years. ## Why This Matters for Workers This case demonstrates that attorneys who violate professional standards face serious consequences, including losing their license to practice law. For workers dealing with employment disputes, this ruling reinforces that lawyers are held accountable by their professional association. If you hire an attorney, you can report misconduct to your state bar association, and disciplinary action—including loss of licensure—is a real possibility for violations.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Similar Rulings

BAUGHMAN
OKLASep 2025

¶0 Plaintiff sued her former employer, alleging she was terminated because of her mental and physical disabilities. Her sole legal claim was for intentional infliction of emotional distress. Defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing, among other things, that the common law claim was prohibited/preempted by the Oklahoma Anti-Discrimination Act. The trial judge granted the motion. Plaintiff then moved to vacate the summary judgment order. Subsequently, the original judge issued an order disqualifying herself. Thereafter, the newly assigned judge granted Plaintiff's motion to vacate the order sustaining summary adjudication. Defendants appealed the order vacating summary judgment, an interlocutory order appealable by right. We retained the appeal and now reverse, remanding with instructions to reinstate the order granting summary judgment in favor of Defendants.

Mixed Result
OBI HOLDING COMPANY v. SCHULTZ-BUTZBACH AND THE WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION
OKLASep 2025

¶0 Employer moved to dismiss Employee's claim pursuant to 85A O.S. § 69 (A)(4)(b) after Employee did not receive or seek medical benefits for a period of nine months. Administrative Law Judge denied Employer's motion to dismiss, and the Workers' Compensation Commission affirmed. We retained the matter for disposition and reverse the order of the Workers' Compensation Commission.

Defendant Win
Agrawal
OKLAOct 2015
Defendant Win
AGRAWAL
OKLAOct 2015
Defendant Win
OKLAHOMA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES ASSOC. v. OKLAHOMA MILITARY DEPT.
OKLAJun 2014
Plaintiff Win

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.