¶ 14 The word "shall" expresses a command or a mandatory directive creating an unequivocal right that leaves no discretion with the court to deny it. Sooner Builders & Invs., Inc. v. Nolan Hatcher Constr. Servs., L.L.C., 2007 OK 50, ¶ 17, 164 P.3d 1063, 1069 (citing Macy v. Freeman, 1991 OK 59, ¶ 8, 814 P.2d 147, 153 ; Forest Oil v. Okla. Corp. Comm'n, 1990 OK 58, ¶ 27, 807 P.2d 774, 787 ). The party that receives "the greatest affirmative judgment" is the prevailing party.
Oklahoma Ass'n for Equitable Taxation v. City of Oklahoma City, see note 10, supra; 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.Oklahoma Ass'n for Equitable Taxation v. City of Oklahoma City, see note 10, supra; McSorley v. Hertz Corp., see note 10, supra; State ex rel. Macy v. Freeman, 1991 OK 59, ¶ 8, 814 P.2d 147.Oklahoma Ass'n for Equitable Taxation v. City of Oklahoma City, see note 10, supra; Oglesby v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., see note 11, supra; Fuller v. Odom, 1987 OK 64, ¶ 4, 741 P.2d 449.
Generally, the word "shall" expresses a command or a mandatory directive; "shall" is the equivalent of "must." Macy v. Freeman, 1991 OK 59, ¶ 8, 814 P.2d 147, 153"; Forest Oil v. Okla. Corporation Comm'n, 1990 OK 58, ¶ 27, 807 P.2d 774, 787. ¶ 18 In mandatory language similar to that used in the involved subcontracts, Oklahoma statutory law, 12 O.S.Supp.2002, § 936, gives the prevailing party in a civil action a right to recover attorney fees.
Nevertheless, the general rule is that the term signifies a command. United States through Farmers Home Admin. v. Hobbs, 1996 OK 77, ¶ 7, 921 P.2d 338; State ex rel. Macy v. Freeman, 1991 OK 59, ¶ 8, 814 P.2d 147; Forest Oil Corp. v. Corporation Comm'n, 1990 OK 58, ¶ 26, 807 P.2d 774. ¶ 7 Shawnee High School representatives protested Brown's suspension before the Association.
Nevertheless, the general rule is that the term signifies a command. United States through Farmers Home Admin. v. Hobbs, 1996 OK 77, ¶ 7, 921 P.2d 338; State ex rel. Macy v. Freeman, 1991 OK 59, ¶ 8, 814 P.2d 147; Forest Oil Corp. v. Corp. Comm'n, 1990 OK 58, ¶ 26, 807 P.2d 774. RELEVANT FACTS
Nevertheless, the statute does not impose a duty on the employer or agency to demonstrate that a lesser disciplinary action would be ineffective before any higher penalty is instituted. United States through Farmers Home Admin. v.Hobbs, 1996 OK 77, ¶ 7, 921 P.2d 338; Stateex rel.Macy v. Freeman, 1991 OK 59, ¶ 8, 814 P.2d 147; Forest Oil Corp. v. Corp. Comm'n, 1990 OK 58, ¶ 26, 807 P.2d 774.Minie v. Hudson, see note 35, supra; Texaco, Inc. v. City of Oklahoma City, 1980 OK 169, ¶ 9, 619 P.2d 869.
The Legislature has used clear and mandatory language in the statute stating that funding disputes shall be resolved by the Excise Board. Under the statute, the Tax Commission's role is limited to ensuring that — once the excise board has made a funding determination — amounts allocated by the excise board to the visual inspection program are used exclusively for the program's purpose and that funds so apportioned are not utilized to decrease the assessor's general obligation funds. Generally, when the Legislature uses the term "shall", it signifies a mandatory directive or command Keating v. Edmondson, see note 22 at ¶ 13, supra; United States through Farmers Home Admin. v.Hobbs, 1996 OK 77, ¶ 7, 921 P.2d 338; Stateex rel.Macy v. Freeman, 1991 OK 59, ¶ 8, 814 P.2d 147; Forest Oil Corp. v. Corporation Comm'n, 1990 OK 58, ¶ 26, 807 P.2d 774. Nevertheless, the term can be used permissively. Minnie v. Hudson, 1997 OK 26, ¶ 7, 934 P.2d 1082;Texaco, Inc. v. City of Oklahoma City, 1980 OK 169, ¶ 0, 619 P.2d 869.
The use of "shall" generally signifies a legislative command. Davis v. GHS Health Maintenance, 2001 OK 3, ¶ 9; United States through Farmers Home Admin. v. Hobbs, 1996 OK 77, ¶ 7, 921 P.2d 338; State ex rel. Macy v. Freeman, 1991 OK 59, ¶ 8, 814 P.2d 147. Nevertheless, the term can be permissive. Minie v. Hudson, 1997 OK 26, ¶ 7, 934 P.2d 10-82; Texaco, Inc. v. City of Oklahoma City, 1980 OK 169, ¶ 9, 619 P.2d 869. Title 85 O.S. 2001 § 5[ 85-5] provides in pertinent part:
The use of "shall" generally signifies a legislative command.Davis v. GHS Health Maintenance, 2001 OK 3, ¶ 9; United States through Farmers Home Admin. v. Hobbs, 1996 OK 77, ¶ 7, 921 P.2d 338;Stateex rel. Macy v. Freeman, 1991 OK 59, ¶ 8, 814 P.2d 147 . Nevertheless, the term can be permissive.
The use of "shall" generally signifies a legislative command. World Pub. Co. v. White, 2001 OK 48, ¶ 7, 32 P.3d 835; United States throughFarmers Home Admin. v. Hobbs, 1996 OK 77, ¶ 7, 921 P.2d 338; State ex rel. Macy v. Freeman, 1991 OK 59, ¶ 8, 814 P.2d 147; Forest Oil Corp. v. Corp. Comm'n, 1990 OK 58, ¶ 26, 807 P.2d 774 . Nevertheless, the term can be permissive.