Oklahoma Code § 12-684

Title 12. Civil Procedure: Dismissal of case – With and without order of court
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this section
A.  An action may be dismissed by the plaintiff without an order
of court by filing a notice of dismissal at any time before
pretrial.  After the pretrial hearing, an action may only be
dismissed by agreement of the parties or by the court.  Unless
otherwise stated in the notice of dismissal or stipulation, the
dismissal is without prejudice.
B.  Except as provided in subsection A of this section, an
action shall not be dismissed at the plaintiff's request except upon
order of the court and upon such terms and conditions as the court
deems proper.  If a counterclaim has been pleaded by a defendant
prior to the service upon the defendant of the plaintiff's motion to
dismiss, the action shall not be dismissed against the defendant's
objection unless the counterclaims can remain pending for
independent adjudication by the court.  Unless otherwise specified
in the order, a dismissal under this subsection is without
prejudice.
C.  For failure of the plaintiff to prosecute or to comply with
the provisions of this section or any order of court, a defendant

may move for dismissal of an action or of any claim against the
defendant.
D.  The provisions of this section apply to the dismissal of any
counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party claim.  A voluntary
dismissal by the claimant alone pursuant to subsection A of this
section shall be made before a responsive pleading is served or, if
there is none, before the introduction of evidence at the trial or
hearing.
If a plaintiff who has once dismissed an action in any court
commences an action based upon or including the same claim against
the same defendant, the court may make such order for the payment of
costs of the action previously dismissed as it may deem proper and
may stay the proceedings in the action until the plaintiff has
complied with the order.
R.L.1910, § 5126.  Amended by Laws 2004, c. 368, § 4, eff. Nov. 1,
2004; Laws 2013, 1st Ex.Sess., c. 13, § 5; Laws 2013, 1st Ex.Sess.,
c. 13, § 6.
NOTE:  Laws 2009, c. 228, § 6 was held unconstitutional by the
Oklahoma Supreme Court in the case of Douglas v. Cox Retirement
Properties, Inc., 2013 OK 37, 302 P.2d 789 (Okla. 2013) and repealed
by Laws 2013, 1st Ex.Sess., c. 13, § 4.

‹ Prev All Oklahoma sections Next ›


Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Statute text is provided for general information and may not reflect the most recent amendments; verify against the official state code.