Court Opinion

ID: 9538017
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 07:28:34.089375+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:57:18.729878
License: Public Domain

SIMMS, Justice,
concurring in part, dissenting in part:
I would have granted certiorari in this matter only for the limited purpose of examining the attorney’s fee award to defendant Jackson.
I concur with the majority’s reversal of the attorney’s fee award for the reason that by statute a defendant who transfers a case out of small claims court, as Jackson did in the instant case, is unable to recover attorney’s fees. Under 12 O.S.1981, § 1757, such a defendant is subject to payment of plaintiff’s attorney’s fees if plaintiff prevails, but is not afforded a reciprocal right should he prevail. In Thayer v. Phillips Petroleum Co., Okl., 613 P.2d 1041 (1980), this Court reviewed that statutory differentiation of treatment and held that no constitutional repugnancy results. That statute controls here.