In Cofer v. Morton, 784 P.2d 67, 70 (Okla. 1989), this Court held that "[r]ights of recovery under the Uninsured Motorist Act [Section(s) 3636] are governed by the statute in effect on the date of issuance or last renewal of the policy against which an uninsured motorist claim is made." Accord McSorley v. Hertz Corp., 885 P.2d 1343, 1344 n. 1 (Okla. 1994); Uptegraft v. Home Ins. Co., 662 P.2d 681, 684 n. 2 (Okla. 1983). As previously set forth, UM coverage was imputed to National Gypsum's policy before the 1990 changes to Section(s) 3636.
' " (quoting Hamrick v. George , 1962 OK 247, ¶ 7, 378 P.2d 324, 326 ) ).Cox , 2004 OK 17, ¶ 19, 87 P.3d at 615 (citing McSorley v. Hertz Corp. , 1994 OK 120, ¶ 6, 885 P.2d 1343, 1346 ; Smicklas v. Spitz , 1992 OK 145, ¶ 8, 846 P.2d 362, 366 ; Oglesby v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. , 1992 OK 61, ¶ 8, 832 P.2d 834, 839-40 ); City of Midwest City v. Harris , 1977 OK 7, ¶ 6, 561 P.2d 1357, 1358.Cox , 2004 OK 17, ¶ 19, 87 P.3d at 615 (citing Haney v. State , 1993 OK 41, ¶ 5, 850 P.2d 1087, 1089 ; Pub. Serv. Co. of Okla. v. State ex rel. Corp. Comm'n , 1992 OK 153, ¶ 8, 842 P.2d 750, 752 ).
Except when a contrary intention plainly appears, terms are given their plain and ordinary meaning.Oklahoma Ass'n for Equitable Taxation v. City of Oklahoma City, 1995 OK 62, ¶ 5, 901 P.2d 800; McSorley v. Hertz Corp., 1994 OK 120, ¶ 6, 885 P.2d 1343; Smicklas v. Spitz, 1992 OK 145, ¶ 8, 846 P.2d 362.Oklahoma Ass'n for Equitable Taxation v. City of Oklahoma City, see note 10, supra; McSorley v. Hertz Corp., see note 10, supra; Oglesby v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 1992 OK 61, ¶ 8, 832 P.2d 834.
The fact that it did not supports the conclusion that the Legislature did not intend for counties to have direct enforcement authority to collect unpaid taxes. See McSorley v. Hertz Corp., 1994 OK 120, ¶ 19, 885 P.2d 1343, 1350–51 (omission of self-insurers from the list of those statutorily required to offer uninsured motorist coverage was evidence of legislative intent not to require self-insurers to offer uninsured motorist coverage). Nor can we conclude that this omission was inadvertent, at least with respect to the DSTA.
White v. Lim, 2009 OK 79, ¶ 12, 224 P.3d 679; Head v. McCracken, 2004 OK 84, ¶ 13, 102 P.3d 670; Balfour v. Nelson, 1994 OK 149, ¶ 8, 890 P.2d 916. Keating v. Edmondson, 2001 OK 110, ¶ 8, 37 P.3d 882; McSorley v. Hertz Corp., 1994 OK 120, ¶ 6, 885 P.2d 1343; Oglesby v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 1992 OK 61, ¶ 8, 832 P.2d 834. Haney v. State, 1993 OK 41, ¶ 5, 850 P.2d 1087; Public Serv. Co. of Oklahoma v. State ex rel. Corp. Comm'n, 1992 OK 153, ¶ 8, 842 P.2d 750.
White v. Lim, 2009 OK 79, ¶ 12, 224 P.3d 679;Head v. McCracken, 2004 OK 84, ¶ 13, 102 P.3d 670;Balfour v. Nelson, 1994 OK 149, ¶ 8, 890 P.2d 916.Keating v. Edmondson, 2001 OK 110, ¶ 8, 37 P.3d 882;McSorley v. Hertz Corp., 1994 OK 120, ¶ 6, 885 P.2d 1343;Oglesby v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 1992 OK 61, ¶ 8, 832 P.2d 834.Haney v. State, 1993 OK 41, ¶ 5, 850 P.2d 1087;Public Serv. Co. of Oklahoma v. State ex rel. Corp. Comm'n, 1992 OK 153, ¶ 8, 842 P.2d 750.
White v. Lim, 2009 OK 79, ¶12, 224 P.3d 679; Head v. McCracken, 2004 OK 84, ¶13, 102 P.3d 670; Balfour v. Nelson, 1994 OK 149, ¶8, 890 P.2d 916, 39 A.L.R.5th 935. Keating v. Edmondson, 2001 OK 110, ¶8, 37 P.3d 882; McSorley v. Hertz Corp., 1994 OK 120, ¶6, 885 P.2d 1343; Oglesby v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 1992 OK 61, ¶8, 832 P.2d 834. Haney v. State, 1993 OK 41, ¶5, 850 P.2d 1087; Public Serv. Co. of Oklahoma v. Stateex rel. Corp. Comm'n, 1992 OK 153, ¶8, 842 P.2d 750.
White v. Lim, 2009 OK 79, ¶ 12, 224 P.3d 679;Head v. McCracken, 2004 OK 84, ¶ 13, 102 P.3d 670;Balfour v. Nelson, 1994 OK 149, ¶ 8, 890 P.2d 916, 39 A.L.R.5th 935.Keating v. Edmondson, 2001 OK 110, ¶ 8, 37 P.3d 882;McSorley v. Hertz Corp., 1994 OK 120, ¶ 6, 885 P.2d 1343;Oglesby v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 1992 OK 61, ¶ 8, 832 P.2d 834.Haney v. State, 1993 OK 41, ¶ 5, 850 P.2d 1087;Public Serv. Co. of Oklahoma v. State ex rel. Corp. Comm'n, 1992 OK 153, ¶ 8, 842 P.2d 750.
27. White v. Lim, 2009 OK 79, ¶ 12, 224 P.3d 679; Head v. McCracken, 2004 OK 84, ¶ 13, 102 P.3d 670; Balfour v. Nelson, 1994 OK 149, ¶ 8, 890 P.2d 916, 39 A.L.R.5th 935. 28. Keating v. Edmondson, 2001 OK 110, ¶ 8, 37 P.3d 882; McSorley v. Hertz Corp., 1994 OK 120, ¶ 6, 885 P.2d 1343; Oglesby v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 1992 OK 61, ¶ 8, 832 P.2d 834. 29. Haney v. State, 1993 OK 41, ¶ 5, 850 P.2d 1087; Public Serv. Co. of Oklahoma v. State ex rel. Corp. Comm'n, 1992 OK 153, ¶ 8, 842 P.2d 750.
FN11. Smicklas v. Spitz, 1992 OK 145, ¶ 8, 846 P.2d 362; Clifton v. Clifton, 1990 OK 88, ¶ 7, 801 P.2d 693; Fuller v. Odom, 1987 OK 64, ¶ 4, 741 P.2d 449. FN12. Tyler v. Shelter Mut. Ins. Co., see note 10, supra; McSorley v. Hertz Corp., 1994 OK 120, ¶ 6, 885 P.2d 1343; Oglesby v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 1992 OK 61, ¶ 8, 832 P.2d 834. FN13. Hill v. Board of Education, see note 15, infra; Haney v. State, 1993 OK 41, ¶ 5, 850 P.2d 1087; Public Serv. Co. of Oklahoma v. State ex rel. Corp. Comm'n, 1992 OK 153, ¶ 8, 842 P.2d 750.