Cook v. State Industrial Court

3 Citing cases

  1. State Highway Dept. v. Shacklefoot

    1977 OK 245 (Okla. 1977)

    The provisions above quoted charged respondents with responsibility of presenting all necessary medical evidence at June 14, 1976 hearing. Whatever might have interfered with respondent securing examination and disability evaluation following receipt of report from Dr. J.J.M., did not prevent tendering other medical evidence. Respondent could have achieved the same result by offering testimony from a medical expert at the hearing. A related matter was considered in Cook v. State Industrial Court (Okla., 1974), 518 P.2d 311. We reversed an order denying compensation for alleged failure of claimant's medical evidence because of failure of a party who assumed burden of proof to go forward with medical evidence required for proper submission of the cause.

  2. Oklahoma Cotton Coop Ass'n Compress v. Thomas

    560 P.2d 562 (Okla. 1977)   Cited 6 times

    Rule 12, supra, requires the initiation of affirmative action by the party seeking the cross examination. Cook v. State Industrial Court, Okla., 518 P.2d 311 (1974). Affirmative action on the part of the claimant, by deposition or otherwise, is missing here. Trial court was not correct in refusing introduction of the nurse's affidavit based on denial of cross examination.

  3. Largent v. State Industrial Court

    556 P.2d 262 (Okla. 1976)   Cited 1 times

    The Trial Court correctly determined the issue as to costs. Our decision in Cook v. State Industrial Court, 518 P.2d 311 (Okla. 1974), is cited in support of Claimant's argument. That case presented an entirely different issue arising from matters involving Rule 12, supra. We observe nothing in the reasoning, nor by valid inference, which supports Claimant's argument that deposition expenses are to be allowed as costs to the prevailing party in every instance.