Court Opinion

ID: 9537964
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 07:27:59.461927+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:57:14.420071
License: Public Domain

HANSEN, Presiding Judge,
dissenting:
Ingram v. Oneok, Inc., 775 P.2d 810 (Okla.1989) holds that an action for damages for retaliatory discharges under 85 O.S.1981 §§ 5-7 is not a tort action subject to the limitations of 12 O.S.1981 § 95(3) but rather an “action upon a liability created by statute.” The Supreme Court applied the three year limitation period of 12 O.S.1981 § 95(2) to such actions.
In my view, Plaintiff’s petition for damages for retaliatory discharge under the Workers’ Compensation Act was timely filed by virtue of the law .set out in the above decision.
I therefore respectfully dissent.