Ray v. Woodard

3 Citing cases

  1. Carignan v. State

    1970 OK 82 (Okla. 1970)   Cited 11 times

    This determination was unappealed and became final. See Miracle v. Miracle, Okla., 388 P.2d 9; Ray v. Woodard, Okla., 377 P.2d 216, and In re Harris, Okla., 434 P.2d 477. Defendant contends that under § 1130, supra, he is entitled to six months after date his children were adjudged dependent and neglected in order to show capability of providing the proper parental care.

  2. State v. Lohah

    1967 OK 165 (Okla. 1967)   Cited 17 times
    In State ex rel. Cox v. Lohah, 434 P.2d 928 (Okla. 1967) our own Court explained that a district court possessed the statutory authority under 12 O.S. 1961 § 1277[ 12-1277], now codified at 43 O.S.Supp. 1993 § 112[ 43-112], to award custody to a third party if both parents are unfit.

    State v. Alexander, supra; Ex parte Lewis, 85 Okla. Cr. 322, 188 P.2d 367. Our attention has been called to the fact that in the case of Ray v. Woodard, Okla., 377 P.2d 216, we made the statement that the county court in a proceeding similar to the matter in question had the exclusive original jurisdiction. This statement was dicta.

  3. In re Harris

    1966 OK 253 (Okla. 1967)   Cited 7 times

    The juvenile court, at a hearing on January 10, 1964, permanently fixed the custody of the children in the Welfare Department which order was affirmed by the district court on June 30, 1964. This appeal being from an order of the court changing the custody of the children as distinguished from an order determining them to be neglected and dependent, plaintiff was not entitled to a jury trial as a matter of right. Ray v. Woodard, Okla., 377 P.2d 216. Plaintiff in error contends the trial court erred in not allowing a minor child to testify as a witness.