The Oklahoma Bar Journal February 2023

A ppellate L aw

An Overview on Filing an Original Action With the Oklahoma Supreme Court

By Kyle Rogers

T HE OKLAHOMA SUPREME COURT has both appellate jurisdiction and original juris diction flowing from Article VII, Section 4 of the Oklahoma Constitution. 1 The Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction provides “general superintending control over all inferior courts and all Agencies, Commissions and Boards created by law.” 2 Outside of the appellate process, the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction allows the court to examine a broad swath of proceedings.

Constitution conceived of the Supreme Court’s original jurisdic tion, “when concurrent with that of the district court,” to function as a “stand-by service” to be “exercised only when, from the exigencies of the case, great injury will be done by its refusal so to do.” 5 The major ity of these proceedings involve petitions for writs of mandamus or prohibition, parties seeking to direct or stop some action in a district court. The Supreme Court has long referred to these writs as extraordinary and rare. 6 For the court to assume original jurisdic tion to issue a writ of mandamus or prohibition, a petitioner must first establish the elements for a writ of mandamus 7 or prohibition. 8 For both mandamus and prohibition, a peti tioner must show they lack another adequate remedy; it is not enough that a petitioner simply needs a quick remedy. 9 For a writ of manda mus , a petitioner must then estab lish they have a “clear legal right” to the desired relief, and the district

court “has a plain legal duty regarding” that relief that does not involve discretion, but then the dis trict court has “refused to perform that duty.” 10 For a writ of prohibi tion, a petitioner must then set out that a court or agency is exercising quasi-judicial power and that “power is unauthorized by law.” 11 And even if a petitioner sets out the elements for either mandamus or prohibition, the court may not issue a writ in its discretion. 12 The Supreme Court treats original actions involving discov ery orders differently from other original actions for mandamus or prohibition. 13 The court applies a different standard to discovery orders, first examining whether the case is one of the rare occasions it should serve as a “pretrial reviewing panel for trial court orders adjudi cating discovery matters.” 14 Or, as the court has recently explained, the discovery order must be “aberrant.” 15 Instead of applying the factors of a writ of mandamus or prohibition, the

The Supreme Court often uses the term original action to refer to these proceedings, and original actions encompass filings seeking writs for mandamus , prohibition, habeas corpus , certiorari 3 and quo warranto . The court also invokes its original jurisdiction for attorney discipline matters and where the Legislature has given the court exclusive orig inal jurisdiction, like initiative and referendum petitions and bond and contract approval. 4 For parties or attorneys filing original actions before the Supreme Court, this article lays out the more common grounds for original actions and examines the court’s rules on orig inal actions, providing a few tips to consider before filing. The Supreme Court’s origi nal action jurisdiction is almost entirely discretionary, with some exceptions for statutory grants of exclusive original jurisdiction. In fact, the drafters of the Oklahoma ORIGINAL ACTIONS

FEBRUARY 2023 | 7

THE OKLAHOMA BAR JOURNAL