Skip to main content

State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Association v. Claborn

OKLAMarch 25, 2019No. Case Number: SCBD-6746Cited 1 time
RemandedClaborn

Case Details

Status
Published

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

Insufficient information provided to determine the outcome of this disciplinary case against an attorney.

What This Ruling Means

# State ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Association v. Claborn ## What Happened The Oklahoma Bar Association brought a disciplinary case against an attorney named Claborn. This type of case typically involves an allegation that a lawyer violated professional rules or ethical standards that attorneys must follow. ## What the Court Decided The court's ruling on this case was deemed unresolvable based on the available information, meaning the specific outcome details were not fully documented or the case status remained unclear at the time of filing in March 2019. ## Why This Matters for Workers Attorney discipline cases are important for workers because they protect the public from unethical legal representation. When bar associations investigate lawyers, they help ensure that workers seeking legal help—whether for employment disputes, workplace injuries, or other issues—are dealing with qualified professionals who follow ethical rules. These disciplinary proceedings help maintain trust in the legal system that workers depend on to protect their rights.

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.