Date: 04-27-2001

Case Style: Davis v. Board of Regents For Oklahoma State University

Case Number: 2001 OK CIV APP

Judge: Larry Joplin

Court: Oklahoma Court of Appeals

Plaintiff's Attorney: Jack R. Green, Norman, Oklahoma

Defendant's Attorney: James M. Robinson, Assistant Attorney General, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma

Description: 1 Plaintiff/Appellant Alice B. Davis (Plaintiff) seeks review of the trial court's order granting the motion for summary judgment of the Defendants/Appellees Board of Regents for Oklahoma State University and the Agricultural and Mechanical Colleges, Langston University, the individual regents by name, and Ernest L. Holloway, president of Langston, (collectively Defendants or by name) in Plaintiff's action against Defendants to recover damages for retaliatory demotion, defamation, violation of due process, and interference with an economic relationship. Having reviewed the record, however, we conclude the order of the trial court should be affirmed.

2 In 1985, Plaintiff, then employed as Assistant to the Dean of Research and Extension Services Department of Langston University, discovered and reported alleged fiscal mismanagement of USDA funds by Holloway and a vice-president. According to Plaintiff, Holloway and the vice-president consequently pressured Plaintiff's supervisor — Dr. Simpson, Dean of the department — to remove Plaintiff from any accounting functions, and in 1987, essentially divested Plaintiff of any power, control or authority over departmental funds.

3 In 1991, Plaintiff discovered travel claim irregularities by Holloway,1 and reported the discovery to Dr. Simpson. Upon further alleged retaliatory conduct by Holloway and his vice-president, Plaintiff filed a grievance in August 1991. At a grievance hearing in September 1992, the grievance committee found in favor of Plaintiff, but Holloway, in his capacity as president, refused the committee's recommendations, and the Board of Regents refused to hear Plaintiff's further appeal. According to Plaintiff, Holloway continued to pressure Dr. Simpson to remove Plaintiff from all accounting duties or terminate Plaintiff's employment, but Dr. Simpson refused.

* * *

Click the case caption above for the full text of the Court's opinion.

Outcome: ¶16 The order of the trial court granting the motion for summary judgment of Defendants is therefore AFFIRMED.

Plaintiff's Experts: Unknown

Defendant's Experts: Unknown

Comments: Plaintiff filed suit against a political subdivision and the employees thereof, Plaintiff is bound by the provisions of the Oklahoma Governmental Tort Claims Act (OGTCA), 51 O.S. 1991 §151 et seq. The OGTCA not only provides immunity for the State but also provides very specific time periods in which a claim must be pursued. 51 O.S. §§156 , 157.