The Oklahoma Bar Journal September 2022

I N OKLAHOMA, SCHOOL DISTRICTS ARE POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS OF THE STATE. Any attorney who has worked for or against the state of Oklahoma or a political subdi vision is likely familiar with the Oklahoma Governmental Tort Claims Act (GTCA). That same attorney would likely tell you that compliance with the provisions of the GTCA is not always straightforward as there is a myriad of procedural steps a plaintiff must maneuver through before filing a lawsuit sounding in tort 1 against a political subdivision in dis trict court. Unfortunately, the case law construing the GTCA sometimes leaves attorneys with more questions than answers. This article will focus primarily on the opinion of the Oklahoma Supreme Court in I.T.K. v. Mounds Public Schools , which interpreted a seem ingly unambiguous provision of the GTCA and came to an unexpected conclusion and two opinions that have since been handed down by other courts that relied on Mounds . 2

operated a school bus and caused injury to the six-year-old plain tiff. Thankfully, the plaintiff was not seriously injured, but he was taken to an emergency room, given several diagnostic tests and treated for two lacerations. 6 The plain tiff sought damages for medical expenses and associated pain and suffering. 7 The plaintiff’s attorney sent a letter to the school superintendent and school insurance adjuster two weeks after the incident occurred, notifying them of his representation of the plaintiff, the plaintiff’s injuries and the manner in which the inju ries were sustained. 8 Ostensibly, this notification was intended to satisfy the tort claim notice requirements under §156(E) of the GTCA. 9

The pivotal question in Mounds was whether the plaintiff’s attor ney failed to satisfy the require ment of §156(D), quoted above, requiring a claim to be in writing and filed with the clerk of the governing body. After all, §156(D) does not state that a claim against a political subdivision shall be in writing and filed with the office of a representative ( i.e., superinten dent) of the governing body. Such an argument might seem trivial, but the statutory language explic itly requires the notice to be filed with the clerk of the governing body of the relevant political sub division, and its language would appear to be unambiguous. Accordingly, Mounds Public Schools argued the lawsuit was

THE GTCA NOTICE REQUIREMENT AT ISSUE IN MOUNDS At issue in Mounds was §156(D) of the GTCA, which states “a claim against a political subdivision shall be in writing and filed with the office of the clerk of the gov erning body” 3 within one year of the date of loss. 4 This is a juris dictional prerequisite to filing an action in court. 5 A plain reading of the language of this statute would cause the reader to take note of two requirements. A tort claim against a political subdivision of the state must be 1) in writing and 2) filed with the office of the gov erning body’s clerk. The plaintiff in Mounds alleged that a school bus driver negligently

SEPTEMBER 2022 | 27

THE OKLAHOMA BAR JOURNAL