Haworth v. Court on Judiciary, Trial Div.

Decision Date26 September 1975
Docket NumberNo. CJAD-75-2,CJAD-75-2
Citation684 P.2d 1217
PartiesWilliam H. HAWORTH, Jr., Petitioner, v. COURT ON the JUDICIARY, TRIAL DIVISION, Respondent.
CourtOklahoma Court on the Judiciary, Appellate Division

Original Action for Writ of Prohibition.

Petitioner, William H. Haworth, Jr., filed his petition for a writ of prohibition asking this Court to assume jurisdiction and to prohibit the Trial Division of the Court on the Judiciary from further proceeding herein. Application to assume original jurisdiction granted and Trial Division prohibited from proceeding further with Petition filed by the Attorney General on July 7, 1975.

WRIT OF PROHIBITION GRANTED.

Houston & Klein, Inc. by Rooney McInerney, Tulsa, for petitioner.

Jim F. Gassaway, Ada, and Robert J. Turner, Oklahoma City, for respondent.

BARNES, Presiding Judge.

On September 4, 1975, the Trial Division of the Court on the Judiciary overruled and denied Petitioner, William H. Haworth, Jr.'s plea to jurisdiction, amended demurrer, and motion for summary judgment, and set the case, seeking his removal from office, for trial on the merits.

Petitioner, William H. Haworth, Jr., then filed his petition for a writ of prohibition asking that this Court assume jurisdiction and enter an order prohibiting and enjoining the Trial Division of the Court on the Judiciary from further proceeding herein.

Petitioner asserts, inter alia, that the petition invoking the jurisdiction of the Court on the Judiciary, Trial Division, was filed by the Attorney General on July 7, 1975, pursuant to the provisions of 20 O.S.Supp.1974 § 1659, and that the Attorney General signed the petition solely on the basis of the mandatory provision of § 1659, supra, and not as an act of his own as provided by Section 4(a) of Article VII-A of the Constitution of the State of Oklahoma.

Section 4(a) of Article VII-A of the Constitution of the State of Oklahoma provides in part:

"The jurisdiction of the Trial Division of the Court may be invoked by a Petition, filed either by the Supreme Court or the Chief Justice thereof; by the Governor; by the Attorney General; or by the Executive Secretary of the Oklahoma Bar Association when directed so to do by a vote of a majority of all members of its Executive Committee; or by Resolution of the House of Delegates or by Resolution of the House of Representatives of the State of Oklahoma."

When the Legislature created the Council on Judicial Complaints, 20 O.S.Supp.1974 § 1651 et seq., it provided that the jurisdiction of the Trial Division of the Court on the Judiciary could be invoked as follows:

"In the event the Council finds that the Complaint should be made the subject of proceedings before the Court on the Judiciary, it shall forward all papers concerning the same, together with its findings, to the Attorney General, who shall promptly file a Petition invoking the jurisdiction of the Trial Division of the Court on the Judiciary in accordance with § 4(a) of Article VII-A of the Constitution of Oklahoma. Thereafter, the matter shall proceed in accordance with the applicable constitutional provisions, statutes and rules of the said Court on the Judiciary."

The Attorney General has filed an affidavit herein relating to his decision to invoke the jurisdiction of the Court on the Judiciary. Therein he stated:

"I, Larry Derryberry, having been duly sworn, state as follows:

"That I am the duly elected and acting Attorney General and was so acting on July 7, 1975.

"That pursuant to the provisions of 20 O.S.Supp.1974, § 1659, the Council on Judicial Complaints submitted to me its findings, and all papers concerning the same, upon the completion of its investigation of William H. Haworth, Jr.

"That I signed the Petition in Case No. CJ-TD-75-1 in the Court on the Judiciary of the State of Oklahoma, Trial Division, without independent investigation and solely on the basis of the findings forwarded to me by the Council...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • In re Coleman, 118,450
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • December 3, 2019
    ...the judicial misconduct detailed in a report by the Council warrants proceedings before the Court on the Judiciary. Haworth v. Court on the Judiciary, Trial Division , 1975 OK JUD 1, ¶6, 684 P.2d 1217, 1218. ¶5 This Court exercises this discretionary authority to first determine whether the......
  • In re Coleman
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • June 22, 2020
    ...the judicial misconduct detailed in a report by the Council warrants proceedings before the Court on the Judiciary. Haworth v. Court on the Judiciary, Trial Division , 1975 OK JUD 1, ¶6, 684 P.2d 1217, 1218.¶5 This Court exercises this discretionary authority to first determine whether the ......
  • Mattingly v. COURT ON JUDICIARY, TRIAL DIV.
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma
    • July 5, 2000
    ...power and authority in the Court, or from the exercise thereof in aid of its jurisdiction. ¶ 9 In Haworth v. Court on the Judiciary, Trial Division, 1975 OK JUD 1, 684 P.2d 1217, we assumed original jurisdiction and issued a writ prohibiting the Trial Division from proceeding further in a m......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT