The Oklahoma Bar Journal August 2022

CONCLUSION

22. Guffey v. Ostonakulov , 2014 OK 6, ¶12, 321 P.3d 971, 975. 23. Montgomery , 2018 OK 17, ¶18, 414 P.3d at 829. 24. Guffey , 2014 OK 6, ¶14, 321 P.3d at 975-976. 25. State ex rel. Fisher v. South Atlantic Dredging Co., Inc. , 2000 OK CIV APP 123, ¶6, 15 P.2d 523, 525 (quoting World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson , 444 U.S. 286, 297, 100 S.Ct. 559, 567, 62 L.Ed.2d 490 (1980)). 26. 12 O.S. §2012(B)(6). 27. Pryor v. Findley , 1997 OK CIV APP 74, ¶2, 949 P.2d 1218, 1219 (quoting Ind. Nat’l Bank v. State Dept. of Human Servs. , 1994 OK 98, 880 P.2d 371, 375-76). 28. Hayes v. Eateries, Inc. , 1995 OK 108, ¶2, 905 P.2d 778, 780. 29. Gens v. Casady School , 2008 OK 5, ¶8, 177 P.3d 565. 30. Id. 31. Gay v. Akin , 1988 OK 150, ¶7, 766 P.2d 985, 989. 32. Id. at ¶8. 33. Id. 34. Estrada v. Kriz , 2015 OK CIV APP 19, ¶23, 345 P. 3d. 403, 410 (citing A-Plus Janitorial & Carpet Cleaning v. Employers’ Workers’ Comp. Ass’n , 1997 OK 37, ¶36, 936 P.2d 916, 931). 35. 12 O.S. §2013(A). 36. Robinson v. Texhoma Limestone, Inc. , 2004 OK 50, ¶8, 100 P.3d 673, 675. 37. Id. (citing Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co. v. District Court, Fifteenth Judicial District , 1989 OK 158, ¶11, 784 P.2d 61, 64). 41. National Union Fire Insurance Company v. A.A.R. Western Skyways, Inc. , 1989 OK 157, ¶7, 754 P.2d 52, 54. 42. 28 U.S.C. §1446(a). 43. Id. at §1446(b)(1). 44. 28 U.S.C. §1332(a). 45. 28 U.S.C. §1331. 46. 28 U.S.C. §1447(c). 47. Furr v. Thomas , 1991 OK 93, ¶23, 817 P.2d 1268, 1272. 48. Prough v. Edinger, Inc. , 1993 OK 130, ¶8, 862 P.2d 71, 75. 38. 12 O.S. §2013(B). 39. 12 O.S. §2013(G). 40. 12 O.S. §832(A).

There are several strategic moves available to a defendant when faced with a new lawsuit. A failure to properly consider these strategic moves as viable options when responding to a petition could lead to a missed opportu nity for your client. Whether it is a current client or a new client, you will want to ensure you are zealously advocating for your client. By considering each of these strategic moves and determining whether any such move is appro priate, it will allow you and your client to put your best foot forward from the beginning. areas of construction law, personal injury law, environmental and toxic tort law, commercial business litigation and family law. She is a 2007 graduate of the TU College of Law. 1. See Okla. Stat. Tit. 12, §2012(A). 2. 1991 OK 20, 807 P.2d 248. 3. Id. ¶4, 807 P.2d at 249. 4. Id. 5. Campbell v. American Intern. Group, 1999 OK CIV APP 37, ¶9, 976 P.2d 1102, 1105. 6. 2021 OK 60, 499 P.3d 1. 7. Id. ¶5 n. 12. 8. Id. 9. Id. 10. Id. 11. Gens v. Casady School , 2008 OK 5, 177 P.3d 565. 12. 12 O.S. §2008. 13. Id. ; Gens , 2008 OK 5. 14. Osage Nation v. Board of Commissioners of Osage County , 2017 OK 34, ¶22, 394 P.3d 1224, 1233-1234. 15. Id. 16. In re. A.N.O. , 2004 OK 33, ¶9, 91 P.3d 646. 17. Id. 18. Id. 19. Doe v. First Presbyterian Church U.S.A. of Tulsa , 2017 OK 106, ¶14, 421 P.2d 284, 288. 20. Id. 21. Montgomery v. Airbus Helicopters, Inc. , 2018 OK 17, ¶18, 414 P.3d 824, 829. ENDNOTES ABOUT THE AUTHOR Melissa East is a partner at McDaniel Acord PLLC in Tulsa. Her practice focuses on general civil litigation, including the

AUGUST 2022 | 27

THE OKLAHOMA BAR JOURNAL