12 Okla. Stat. § 936

Section 936 allows an additional attorney’s fee for work on an appeal in an open-account action.

Drakos v. Edwards · filed 1963-09-17

In the trial court, and pursuant to 12 O.S.1961 § 936, plaintiff, as a part of his judgment, received an award of $75.00, attorney’s fee. He requests a further award of attorney’s fee for the handling ... of the appeal herein. In circumstances of this case, a further award of $100.00, attorney’s fee, is deemed appropriate and is hereby made.

Section 936 requires evidence of the value of an attorney’s services before a court may award a fee when the parties have not agreed on its amount.

Sarkeys v. Haas · filed 1965-05-25

We hold that under Title 12 O.S. 1961, § 936, where no contract or agreement as to the amount of attorney’s fee is involved, the trial court is without authority to render judgment for an attorney’s fee without evidence of the value of the attorney’s services.

Section 936 permits an attorney’s fee award against parties held liable as drawers of an unpaid settlement draft.

Farmers & Merchants Mutual Fire Insurance v. Pulliam · filed 1973-07-13

Having found Reliance and Price in effect liable as drawers of the unpaid settlement draft, the district court could award interest and attorney’s fees to White. 12A O.S. § 3-122, 12 O.S. § 936.

Section 936 entitles the prevailing party in a suit on a note to reasonable attorney fees for necessary work defending an appeal.

Associates Financial Services, Inc. v. Millsap · filed 1977-09-13

As the prevailing party in a suit on a note, appellee Finance Company is clearly entitled to be awarded a reasonable attorney’s fee, under the provisions of 12 O.S.1971 § 936, which provides: ... As prevailing party, appellee is entitled to a reasonable attorney’s fee for all services of an attorney which were necessary in the defense of this appeal. It was clearly necessary that appellee defend against the appeal brought by the appellant. For this reason, we hold that appellee is entitled to be awarded a reasonable attorney’s fee and find that the sum of $500.00 is a reasonable fee for services rendered in this appeal, such fee to be taxed and collected as costs.

Section 936 permits reasonable attorney fees for the prevailing party in an action to recover on a check.

Russell v. Maxson Sales Co. · filed 1979-03-08

In so doing, we remand the action to the Trial Court for consideration of an award of reasonable attorney fees to Appellant Maxson, as the prevailing party in an action to recover on a check, pursuant to the provisions of 12 O.S. 1971, § 936.

Section 936 requires a reasonable attorney fee set by the court and permits an additional fee for services on appeal.

Dubuque Packing Co., Inc. v. Fitzgibbon · filed 1979-08-30

Appellee includes in its brief a request for $1,000 additional attorney fee for the appeal under 12 O.S.1971, § 936. The Appellee was allowed $1,500 as attorney fee for services in the District Court. We believe attorney fees are required under the cited section (“shall be allowed . . . ”) but that the amount must be “reasonable” as “set by the court.” We find that the attorneys for Appellee should be, and they are hereby allowed an attorney fee of $1,000 for services rendered in this appeal, which attorney fee is taxed as part of the cost herein to be paid by the Appellant.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney’s fees in a tort action seeking damages equal to the face amount of a negotiable instrument.

Puckett v. Southeast Plaza Bank · filed 1980-07-03

Trouble is this is not a suit on the negotiable instrument itself. It is a tort action to recover damages equal to the face amount of the draft-a ground not contemplated by § 936.

Section 936 allows the prevailing party to recover reasonable attorney fees incurred at both trial and appellate stages.

Hamilton v. Telex Corp. · filed 1981-03-03

We also observe that no such limitation is present in the provisions of § 936. It is our determination that this section’s authorization of an award to the prevailing party of a reasonable attorney fee includes all fees incurred in actions of those types enumerated in the statute.

Section 936 does not limit an attorney’s fee award to the amount in controversy.

American General Life Insurance Co. of Oklahoma v. Bean · filed 1983-09-13

However, the basis for awarding attorney’s fees in this ease is 12 O.S.1981 § 936. The statute contains no such limitation, nor does Burk.

Section 936 entitles a party who prevails on a covered contract claim at trial to reasonable attorney fees incurred in successfully defending the judgment on appeal.

B & P Construction Co. v. Wells · filed 1988-02-23

In Hamilton v. Telex Corp., 625 P.2d 106, 108-09 (Okl.1981), we found that the party who prevails at trial and is entitled under Section 936 to an award of attorney fees is also entitled to recover attorney fees incurred in successfully defending on appeal.

Section 936 allows reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party in a contract action but does not empower a trial court to award fees or costs incurred on appeal.

Professional Property Investment Corp. v. Marina Ltd. · filed 1990-06-26

While § 936 provides for allowance of a reasonable attorney fee to the prevailing party in an action involving a contract, it does not empower a trial court to award appeal related attorney fees and costs.

Section 936 entitles the prevailing party in an action on a contract to sell a mobile home to attorney fees, including fees for successfully defending the judgment on appeal.

Ellis v. Lebowitz · filed 1990-10-16

Because section 936 allows recovery of attorney fees to the prevailing party in an action on a contract for the sale of goods and a mobile home is defined as a good for the purposes of this case, the defendant is entitled to attorney fees. We have held "that the party who prevails at trial and is entitled under Section 936 to an award of attorney fees is also entitled to recover attorney fees incurred in successfully defending on appeal."

Section 936 allows the court to consider the amount recovered and other circumstances when setting a reasonable attorney fee for the prevailing party.

Arkoma Gas Co. v. Otis Engineering Corp. · filed 1993-03-23

Southwestern Bell Telephone Company, supra, makes clear that the trial court may consider factors other than reasonable hours multiplied by a reasonable rate in determining a reasonable attorney fee under 12 O.S.1981 § 936.

Section 936 allows a prevailing party in a qualifying contract action to recover attorney fees for successfully defending the judgment against a sufficiently related petition to vacate.

Gearhart Industries, Inc. v. Grayfox Operating Co. · filed 1992-04-14

The party who prevails at trial and is entitled to attorney fees under § 936 is also entitled to recover attorney fees incurred in successfully defending on appeal. ... This principle is equally applicable here, where the original judgment was vigorously defended against a later petition to vacate.

Section 936 allows a party entitled to attorney fees at trial to recover fees for successfully defending an appeal, even if the appeal has merit.

Aircraft Equipment Co. v. Kiowa Tribe of Oklahoma · filed 1996-07-16

We have previously held that a party who prevails at trial and who is entitled to § 936 attorneys' fees is also entitled to recover attorneys' fees incurred in successfully defending on appeal. B & P Const. Co. v. Wells, 759 P.2d 208, 209 (Okla.1988). The appeal does not have to be without merit for a prevailing appellate party, who was entitled to attorneys' fees in the district court, to be entitled to attorneys' fees upon appeal. We grant the motion of the appellee.

Section 936 allows denial of appeal-related attorney fees when the judgment is affirmed in part and reversed in part as modified.

Pierce Couch Hendrickson Baysinger & Green v. Freede · filed 1997-03-20

The law firm has filed for appeal-related attorney fees pursuant to sections 696.4 and 936 of title 12 of the Oklahoma Statutes. Because we reverse in part and affirm in part as modified the judgment of the trial court, we find that the law firm’s motion for appeal-related attorney fees should be denied.

Section 936 permits a prevailing party in an action on a contract for the purchase or sale of goods to recover attorney fees, including fees for an appeal.

Kerr v. A & G Auto, Inc. · filed 1999-11-02

Section 936 also provides for attorney fees to be awarded to the prevailing party in an action to recover on a contract relating to the purchase or sale of goods. When a contract or statute authorizes the award of attorney fees in the trial ■ court, additional fees may be allowed for legal services rendered on appeal.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney fees in an action on a written insurance contract because that action is not on an open account.

Globe & Republic Insurance Co. of America v. Independent Trucking Co. · filed 1963-12-03

The cited statute is not applicable. Independent’s action is upon a written contract of insurance and not upon an open account.

Section 936 allows attorney’s fees for an open account, which requires running or concurrent dealings that remain unsettled and leave a contract term or further transactions open.

Nicholson v. Thixton · filed 1968-12-17

The basis of the text rules mentioned, plainly accepted and applied in our decided cases, requires existence of these factors to establish an open account: (1) an account based upon running or concurrent dealings; (2) these dealings have not been closed, settled or stated; (3) some term of the contract remains to be settled between parties, or the agreement contemplates further transactions between the parties. ... The trial court erred in allowing an attorney’s fee to plaintiff.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney fees for a suit to recover a general checking account deposit because the depositor’s agreement with the bank is not an open account.

Ingram v. LIBERTY NATL. BANK & TRUST CO. OF OKLAHOMA CITY · filed 1975-03-25

Under the above statements the agreement between the depositor and bank is that the bank will accept the depositor’s money and keep it safe unitl the depositor demands it or orders it paid to others. It is our conclusion that this is not an “open account” within the meaning of that term, as used in the above statute.

Section 936 allows a reasonable attorney fee for the prevailing party in an action on a contract for the sale of goods, with reasonableness assessed from the fee evidence and the record.

Townsend v. Melody Home Manufacturing Company · filed 1975-10-30

Finally we find no error in the trial court" awarding T-Bar-W’s counsel $1,250 in attorney’s fees pursuant to 12 O. S.1971 § 936. ... Aside from the evidence received by the trial court on the subject of attorney’s fees, the record otherwise contains evidence sufficient to satisfy us that the fee awarded was proper and reasonable.

Section 936 allows the prevailing party to recover attorney’s fees for successfully collecting payment on an account for services.

Robert L. Wheeler, Inc. v. Scott · filed 1991-10-01

In the case at bar the trial court correctly granted § 936 prevailing party attorney’s fees for successfully pursuing collection on an account for services.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney fees for a counterclaim to recover operating expenses under a joint operating agreement when the claim is not an open account.

Oklahoma Oil & Gas Exploration Drilling Program 1983-A v. W.M.A. Corp. · filed 1994-02-01

Although WMA is not entitled to recover attorney fees in connection with its counterclaim under 12 O.S.1991, § 936, it is contractually entitled to recover attorney fees incurred in relation thereto under paragraphs 1(3) and 11(9) of Exhibit C of the JOAs.

Section 936 authorizes a reasonable attorney fee for the prevailing party in an action on an open account.

Spencer v. Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co. · filed 2007-10-09

The trial court found, and we agree, that the award of attorney fees was appropriate under either 12 O.S. Supp. 2002 § 936 or 12 0.8.2001 § 938.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney fees for a party sued only to foreclose a materialmen's lien, even when the plaintiff brings an open account claim against someone else.

MILL CREEK LUMBER & SUPPLY CO. v. BICHSEL · filed 2014-11-18

On its remaining ground for entitlement to an attorney fee, MACI cannot recover pursuant to 12 O.S.2011 § 936 because Mill Creek's action against MACI was not one to recover on an open account.

The 1970 amendment to Section 936 applies to attorney fees taxed as costs when an action begins after the amendment, even if the contract predates it, because those costs are procedural.

Jeffcoat v. Highway Contractors, Inc. · filed 1972-08-01

After a thorough review of the cases from other jurisdictions, we are convinced that the taxing of costs in the instant case relates only to the remedy or mode of procedure, and does not involve substantive rights, thus the Court was correct in awarding plaintiff attorney fees.

Section 936 entitles the prevailing party to an attorney fee in an action on a contractor’s performance bond for unpaid health and welfare contributions.

Pipeline Industry Benefit Fund v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Insurance Co. · filed 1972-10-10

The parties stipulated that $1,000.00 would be a reasonable attorney fee, and under 12 O.S.Supp.1970, § 936, the prevailing party was entitled to an attorney fee.

Section 936 allows a fee award to a prevailing party; a defendant does not prevail merely because the plaintiff settles with a co-defendant and dismisses the action.

Mobile Power Enterprises, Inc. v. Power Vac, Inc., and Anilas Corporation, Eugene Ashley Gaiters v. Power Vac, Inc., and · filed 1974-05-31

... and 12 Okla.Stat. § 936 allow costs to the prevailing party in civil actions. We do not believe, however, that Añilas is a “prevailing party” as meant by the statutes. Generally a prevailing party is the party in whose favor judgment is rendered by the district court.

Section 936 allows only one prevailing party and one attorney’s fee in an action, even when each side wins some issues.

Quapaw Co. v. Varnell · filed 1977-05-26

Both parties agree that 12 O.S.1971, § 936 applies. ... We therefore hold that there can be only one prevailing party, and one attorney’s fee. Further, the prevailing party was Varnell; thus the allowance of an attorney’s fee to Quapaw is reversed and ordered set aside.

Section 936 entitles the prevailing party in an action to recover on a contract relating to the sale of goods to reasonable attorney fees taxed as costs.

Dave Markley Ford, Inc. v. Lair · filed 1977-06-07

As Ms. Lair is the prevailing party in a civil action to-recover on a contract relating to the sale of goods, she is, pursuant to the provisions of 12 O.S.1971 § 936, ... entitled to an award of reasonable attorney fees to be taxed and collected as costs, which is to be set by the trial court.

Section 936 entitles a prevailing customer in a warranty action to a reasonable attorney fee.

Hoort v. Oklahoma Truck Parts, Inc. · filed 1982-08-27

Customer, as prevailing party, was entitled to a reasonable attorney fee. 12 O.S.1971 § 936.

Section 936 allows a party who defeats a cross-petition arising from a services contract to recover reasonable attorney fees as the prevailing defendant, even if its own claim fails.

Walls v. Russell · filed 1974-02-28

The difficulty we have in this case is discovering a basis for disallowing an award of attorney fees to appellant as the prevailing party in regard to appellee’s cross-action — an action which in our opinion comes clearly within the purview of 12 O.S.1971 § 936.

Section 936 entitles a prevailing defendant in an action to recover on a promissory note to a reasonable attorney fee taxed as costs.

Bowles v. City National Bank · filed 1977-03-22

Each of the consolidated cases was a suit to recover on a promissory note, and the judgment rendered against the Bank in the trial court was based upon the terms and the balance due on a promissory note. The Bank having been made a party, is entitled as a prevailing party, to recover a reasonable attorney fee to be set by the trial court and to recover all allowable court costs.

Section 936 allows a party that obtains a net judgment in an action on a contract for the sale of goods to recover attorney fees, even if it does not receive all the relief it requested.

Commercial Communications, Inc. v. State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Board of Public Affairs · filed 1980-06-17

This case involves a contract related to the sale of goods, and there is no assertion that a contrary provision in the contract or in the statutes prohibit the award of attorney fees as costs. Although Commercial Communications did not receive all the relief it requested, it did receive a net judgment against the Board, and as such it was entitled to attorney fees as the prevailing party.

Section 936 requires an attorney fee award to the prevailing party in actions involving notes, bills, or stated accounts.

United Founders Life Insurance Co. v. Life Insurance & Pension Headquarters Agency, Inc. · filed 1981-05-19

Title 12 O.S.1971 § 936 ... provides the prevailing party is entitled to attorney fees on actions involving notes, bills or stated accounts. United Founders’ suit includes all three statutory categories.

Section 936 allows a plaintiff who prevails on a sale-of-goods contract claim through a judgment by confession to recover reasonable attorney fees.

Wieland v. Danner Auto Supply, Inc. · filed 1984-06-26

Thus, a judgment by confession taken against a defendant under § 1101 is a final determination that a plaintiff has prevailed on his claim. Therefore, §§ 936 and 939, directing that a prevailing party shall recover a reasonable attorney fee, are applicable in this case.

Section 936 entitles the prevailing party in an action to recover for labor and materials to an attorney fee; a plaintiff who wins a judgment remains the prevailing party even if the award is less than the defendant’s offer.

Van Cleave v. Kolpak Builders Co. · filed 1985-01-14

On the contrary, we hold that if plaintiff recovers a judgment, he is still the prevailing party even though he recovers less than defendant’s compromise offer. So the result is that since this action is to recover for labor and materials, plaintiff is entitled to an attorney fee under § 936 as the prevailing party, as well as under the lien statute.

Section 936 requires a party seeking attorney fees to have prevailing-party status; a defendant whose summary judgment is reversed does not have that status.

EKE Builders, Inc. v. Quail Bluff Associates · filed 1985-12-24

The remaining matter to be disposed of is Quail Bluffs appeal from the order denying its motion for recovery of its attorney fee against EKE under 12 O.S.1981 § 936. Obviously, in view of the conclusion we have reached in EKE’s appeal, Quail Bluff has not achieved the required status of the “prevailing party” and from the looks of the record is not ever likely to.

Section 936 allows a reasonable attorney fee to the prevailing party in a contract action for the sale of goods, but no fee may be awarded while the action remains pending and no judgment has been rendered.

Carpet World, Inc. v. Riddles · filed 1987-05-26

However where the action is left pending there can be no such allowance. A prevailing party is one in whose favor judgment was rendered and as yet no judgment has been rendered here.

Section 936 permits a reasonable attorney’s fee award to a prevailing party in an action within its scope.

Federal National Bank & Trust Co. of Shawnee v. Shanon Drilling, Inc. · filed 1988-07-19

We further find the trial court properly awarded attorney’s fees in the amount of $27,500 to the Guarantors as the prevailing parties and such award was reasonable and not excessive. 12 O.S. 1981 § 936; National Educators Life Insurance Co. v. Apache Lanes, Inc., 555 P.2d 600 (Okla.1976).

Section 936 permits attorney’s fees in actions on open accounts and contracts for the sale of goods; when claims arise from the same transaction and are interrelated, the party with the greater judgment is the prevailing party.

Western Paper Co. v. Bilby · filed 1989-09-19

Finally, 12 O.S.1981 § 936, provides for attorney’s fees in actions both on open accounts and contracts for the sale of goods. In the instant case, Bilby was clearly the prevailing party, receiving a judgment of $1,058.10 over that of Western Paper. The claims were inexorably interrelated, arising from the same transaction, and not separate and distinct claims. The trial court committed no error in awarding attorney’s fees.

Section 936 attorney’s fees cannot be awarded until there is a prevailing party.

I.C. Gas Amcana, Inc. v. Hood · filed 1992-07-14

The propriety of attorney’s fees recoverable under 12 O.S. 1991 § 936 cannot be decided until there is a prevailing party. Hence, Hood may not recover at this time those attorney’s fees attributable to the counterclaims.

Section 936 allows a prevailing party to recover attorney fees in specified civil actions, including actions for labor or services and on an open account.

Heritage Manufacturing & Building Supply, Inc. v. Abraham Development Company, Inc. · filed 1992-08-27

Moreover the prevailing party in civil actions for labor or services, on an open account, etc., may recover attorney fees. Okla.Stat. tit. 12, § 936 (1991).

Section 936 allows a reasonable attorney fee to the prevailing party in an action for labor and services; a party prevails when it receives an affirmative judgment.

Bullard's Oil Field Service, Inc. v. Williford Energy Co. · filed 1992-09-15

Title 12 O.S.1991, § 936... provides that the prevailing party in an action to recover for labor and services shall be allowed a reasonable attorney fee. ... At the end of the first appeal there was no prevailing party because neither party had an affirmative judgment.

Section 936 requires an award of reasonable attorney's fees to the prevailing party in an action to rescind a sales contract.

William J. Osterhoudt and Gary T. Osterhoudt, and Oz-T Ltd., a Delaware Corporation v. Marmon Motor Company, a Texas Cor · filed 1993-02-05

In a lawsuit for rescission of a sales contract, Okla.Stat. tit. 12, § 936 applies to determine whether a plaintiff is entitled to an award of attorney's fees. ... Because section 936 provides that the prevailing party "shall" be awarded attorney's fees, the trial court is left with no discretion and attorney's fees must be awarded.

Section 936 does not award attorney fees to a party who obtains vacation of a foreign judgment without an adjudication on the merits.

Firemen's Insurance Co. of Newark v. Renegar · filed 1993-05-11

The trial court’s refusal to give full faith and credit to the foreign judgment by vacating it was not an adjudication upon the merits, and thus, Appellant was not the “prevailing party” entitled to attorney fees under Section 936.

Section 936 treats a plaintiff who rejects a formal offer of judgment and then recovers less at trial as not the prevailing party, allowing the defendant to recover attorney’s fees incurred after the offer.

Hicks v. Lloyd's General Insurance Agency, Inc. · filed 1988-09-20

In construing § 936 where defendant has made an offer to allow judgment to be taken and it is rejected and ... plaintiff subsequently recovers less than the stated offer, we hold that plaintiff is not the prevailing party for § 936 purposes.

Section 936 does not entitle a party that has not prevailed to attorney fees.

Hough v. Leonard · filed 1993-09-29

Under our decision today, the non-residents are not prevailing parties entitled to the award of costs and attorney fees. 12 O.S. 1991 § 929; 12 O.S. 1991 § 928; 12 O.S. 1991 § 936.

Section 936 treats a prevailing party's attorney fee as costs, with entitlement arising when the underlying claim is adjudicated.

Keel v. Wright · filed 1995-03-07

The fee ultimately allowed in the order filed June 16, 1993 was based on prevailing party status under 12 O.S. 1991 § 936. Under that section the fee is "to be taxed and collected as costs." Plaintiff's right to the fee did not come into being until prevailing party status was created upon adjudication of the underlying cause of action. Thus we do not view the attorney's fee prayer as part of plaintiff's cause of action for breach of contract.

Section 936 entitles a defendant who succeeds in vacating a default judgment in an open-account action to attorney fees as a prevailing party, even if the plaintiff later voluntarily dismisses her.

Professional Credit Collections, Inc. v. Smith · filed 1997-03-04

Smith’s dismissal as a party defendant, after her successful participation in the vacation process, came too late for PCC to escape its § 936 liability for counsel-fee award. By the unmistakably clear § 936 standards Smith’s success in vacating the judgment placed her in the status of “prevailing party” entitled to an attorney’s-fee award.

Section 936 does not entitle a party to attorney’s fees as a prevailing party when its judgment has been vacated.

Bank of Oklahoma, N.A. v. Portis · filed 1997-05-06

Both parties assert the trial court erred in denying an attorney’s fee. BOK contends that because the trial court awarded it a judgment of $293.13 in accrued late charges, it is the prevailing party in an action (1) to recover on a contract or (2) to enforce a lien. 12 O.S.1991, § 936, and 42 O.S.1991, § 176. Because we have vacated that judgment, it follows BOK is not entitled to an attorney’s fee as a prevailing party.

Section 936 does not entitle a defendant to attorney fees for winning some claims when only the plaintiff receives a money judgment.

Cleveland v. Dyn-A-Mite Pest Control, Inc. · filed 2002-04-30

In this case, only the Clevelands received a money judgment. Therefore, they were the only prevailing party, and Brewer-Russell is not entitled to attorney fees.

Section 936 allows a reasonable attorney fee to the prevailing party in an action on a contract for labor or services, but an unconditional award must wait until the prevailing party is determined at the end of the case.

Gamble, Simmons & Co. v. Kerr-McGee Corp. · filed 2002-07-22

Oklahoma law allows a reasonable attorney fee to the prevailing party in an action on a contract for labor or services. Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 936. ... Until the ultimate prevailing party has been determined, neither party is entitled to an unconditional award of prevailing party attorney’s fees.

Section 936 permits separate prevailing parties in a multiparty action to recover reasonable attorney fees based on their respective judgments.

Tulsa Litho Co. v. Tile & Decorative Surfaces Magazine Publishing, Inc. · filed 1995-10-31

Since the court granted Mr. Fisher summary judgment over Tulsa Litho, he was the prevailing party as between himself and Tulsa Litho. Tulsa Li-tho, on the other hand, was the prevailing party with respect to it against each of the corporate defendants.

Section 936 allows a reasonable attorney fee to the prevailing party in an action to recover for labor or services or for breach of implied warranty.

L. Environmental Service, Inc. v. United Motors, Inc. · filed 2006-03-24

Section 936 allows a reasonable attorney fee to the prevailing party in an action to recover for labor or services, and for breach of implied warranty.

Section 936 permits attorney fees to a defendant after voluntary dismissal only if the defendant obtained affirmative relief; dismissal alone does not make the defendant a prevailing party.

ASSET ACCEPTANCE, LLC v. Smith · filed 2010-02-12

Smith relies on Professional Credit Collections, Inc. v. Smith, 1997 OK 19, 933 P.2d 307, for her "prevailing party" attorney fee request pursuant to 12 O.S.Supp.2002 § 936, which allows a prevailing party to recover attorney fees as costs in actions on various types of accounts, bills, and contracts. Professional Credit Collections stands for the proposition that a defendant must be able to show that he or she received affirmative relief in order to receive attorney fees as a "prevailing party" when a lawsuit is voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff. ... We find Smith's argument-that the debt had been previously satisfied by compromise settlement on November 28, 2005, and she had asked for costs and attorney fees-presents no factual affirmative relief.

Section 936(A) allows attorney fees only to a prevailing party; a defendant that reduces the claimant’s recovery without obtaining a judgment in its favor does not qualify.

BP America Production Co. v. Chesapeake Exploration, LLC · filed 2014-05-02(A)

And while Chesapeake successfully defended some of BP’s claims, a defense that limits a claimant’s recovery but does not result in a judgment for the defendant does not entitle the defendant to prevailing party status under Oklahoma law.

Section 936 requires a party seeking attorney fees to prevail on a fee-bearing claim by obtaining a judgment in its favor.

Tulsa Adjustment Bureau, Inc. v. Calnan · filed 2018-06-26(A)

While TAB's claims in this case may very well be fee-bearing under section 936, TAB cannot be labeled the "prevailing party."

Section 936 does not award fees to a debtor who lost the underlying services action merely because the debtor later prevailed in a dischargeability proceeding.

Matthews, Jr. v. Gamboa · filed 2020-09-17(A)

It would be incongruous, if not nonsensical, to find that Gamboa was entitled to attorney’s fees as the “prevailing party” in an action based on Title 12 O.S. § 936 when he was judicially determined to be the “non-prevailing party” under that statute.

Section 936 does not award prevailing party attorney fees to a defendant whose case is dismissed with prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction without a decision on the merits or a judgment in the defendant's favor.

COMANCHE NATION OF OKLAHOMA v. COFFEY · filed 2020-11-17(A)

A prevailing party is one who prevails on the merits of the action or for whom final judgment is rendered. When the trial court dismissed the case with prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, it did not make a determination on the merits or enter final judgment. While Coffey was successful on his motion to dismiss, he has not prevailed on the merits nor has final judgment been rendered in his favor. Therefore, Coffey is not entitled to prevailing party attorney fees under 12 O.S. § 936.

Section 936 awards reasonable attorney’s fees to the prevailing party on a claim for unpaid labor or services; a reduced recovery on a single claim does not make the opposing party a co-prevailing party.

Winco Foods v. Crossland Construction Company · filed 2022-05-10

In sum, the jury concluded that Crossland was owed money by WinCo for its unpaid labor and services. Crossland, therefore, was the only prevailing party under the only fee-bearing statute at issue, 12 Okla. Stat. § 936, based on the verdict and judgment in its favor for recovery of unpaid labor and services. It is entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees—and, consequently, costs—and WinCo is not.

Section 936 provides reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party in an action to recover on an open account or a contract for the purchase or sale of goods.

World Fuel Service Inc v. Bales · filed 2022-11-02

Additionally, Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 936 provides for the award of ... reasonable attorneys’ fees to the prevailing party in a civil action to recover on an open account or contract relating to the purchase or sale of goods.

Section 936(A) allows the prevailing party in specified contract disputes to recover a reasonable attorney fee.

Matlock v. Redbird Business Group LLC · filed 2023-09-01(A)

As the basis for his request for attorneys’ fees, Plaintiff cites Okla. Stat. tit. 12, § 936(A), which authorizes attorneys’ fees to the prevailing party in certain contract disputes. ... Plaintiff is awarded $20,545.00 in attorneys’ fees as well as prejudgment interest from April 30, 2022 to the date of this order and post-judgment interest pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961.

Section 936 attorney fees cannot be awarded before a final judgment establishes the prevailing party.

Ganjawala v. Jariwala · filed 2024-09-09

Defendants’ counterclaims remain outstanding, and no operative final judgment has been entered. Thus, any determination as to which party is the prevailing party, and whether attorneys’ fees should be awarded to that party, would be premature at this time.

Section 936 allows attorney fees to a party that prevails in a covered action even if no formal judgment is entered in that party's favor.

Tomahawk Resources, Inc. v. Craven · filed 2005-11-15

The word "judgment" is not used in section 936. The only requirement is that the party prevail in an action enumerated in the statute. Here, the Cravens prevailed on their claim for breach of contract and are entitled to attorney fees under 12 O.S. § 936.

Section 936(A) requires an award of reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party in covered contract actions.

Arkon Solutions Inc v. Platinum Chemical Corporation · filed 2023-03-29(A)

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant Platinum Chemical Corporation shall pay $18,124.50 in attorney’s fees to Plaintiff Arkon Solutions, Inc. pursuant to title 12, section 936(A) of the Oklahoma Statutes.

Section 936 provides for attorney's fees in covered contract actions.

Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation v. Salyer Olds-Cadillac-Nissan Co., Brad F. Salyer, Carolyn Jane Salyer, and General · filed 1991-09-06

Because the agreement between the parties and Oklahoma law provided for an award of attorney's fees, see Okla.Stat. tit. 12, § 936, the district court did not err in awarding attorney's fees to plaintiff.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney fees in a tort action against an insurer for bad faith failure to settle within policy limits.

Davis v. National Pioneer Insurance Company · filed 1973-10-02

12 O.S.1971, § 936 does not authorize an attorney fee in such a case nor does any other statute.

Section 936 allows attorney fees to the prevailing party in an action based on quasi-contract or implied contract because either is an action ex contractu.

Welling v. American Roofing & Sheet Metal Co. · filed 1980-09-16

This was a proper application of 12 O.S.1971, § 936, because whether the action is based on quasi-contract or implied contract, the action in any event is ex con-tractu.

Section 936 does not apply to an action involving an insurance contract.

Cox v. American Fidelity Assurance Co. · filed 1978-06-30

Appellant correctly asserts that 12 O.S. 1971 § 936 is inapplicable to an action such as the instant one involving a contract of insurance.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney fees in an insurance coverage dispute.

Spears v. Shelter Mutual Insurance Co. · filed 2003-06-24

Defendant's motion for appeal-related attorney's fees pursuant to 12 O.S. § 936 and 86 0.8. § 3629(B) is denied. Defendant is not entitled to fees under § 986 because that section is not applicable to this insurance coverage dispute.

Section 936 permits reasonable trial attorney fees to be included in a creditor’s proven claim against a surety insurer when the parties stipulate to their amount.

Professional Construction Consultants, Inc. v. State Ex Rel. Grimes · filed 1982-05-12

Appellees do not appear to seriously contend that such fees are not recoverable under 12 O.S.1981, § 936 as construed in ... and the parties having stipulated as to the reasonable value thereof, the same were includible in PCC’s proven claim.

Section 936 allows the prevailing party attorney’s fees in an action on an employment policy that is an enforceable contract for services.

Hansen v. Atlantic Richfield Co. · filed 1975-11-04

Since the plan was to induce plaintiff to continue employment in his present position the Policy was an enforceable contract for services. ... Accordingly it is proper under 12 O.S.1971 § 936 to award attorney’s fees to the prevailing party.

Section 936 allows attorney fees in actions for labor or services rendered, but not in breach-of-warranty actions concerning those services.

Russell v. Flanagan · filed 1975-12-23

For the instant action, plaintiff sought judgment for breach of warranty. While this may be an action collaterally concerning labor or services, it is not a civil action for labor or services within the meaning of the statute, and § 936 is, therefore, inapplicable.

Section 936 allows the prevailing party an attorney’s fee in an action to recover a real estate broker’s commission because brokerage is a service.

Bentley v. Hardin · filed 1978-03-13

The activities of a real estate broker are clearly services and frequently involve labor as well. ... An attorney’s fee should have been allowed under the statute.

Section 936 permits an attorney fee in an action for payment for services rendered, even when the services were performed under a contract.

Hamilton v. Telex Corp. · filed 1978-03-14

Here, the action was brought for failure to pay for services rendered, and the existence of a contract is not material to the outcome. We therefore find, under the authority of Russell, supra, that the Trial Court should have allowed Plaintiff an attorney fee, and we remand to the Trial Court for the setting of said fee.

Section 936 does not allow attorney fees for a claim seeking anticipated profits instead of payment for labor or services performed.

Ferrell Construction Co. v. Russell Creek Coal Co. · filed 1982-02-16

No claim is made herein for labor or service performed. It is rather a suit to recover anticipated profits which Ferrell claims it would have realized had Russell not breached the contract. Therefore, neither party will be able to recover an award for attorney fees under 12 O.S.1971, § 936, and the determination by the trial court that no attorney fees should be awarded to Ferrell should be reinstated, and sustained.

Section 936 authorizes attorney’s fees for a subcontractor who recovers payment for masonry work, including fees for an appeal.

M & W Masonry Construction, Inc. v. Head · filed 1977-03-31

The judgment below is therefore reversed and judgment is entered for plaintiff against defendants for $10,810, together with six percent interest from the 11th day of May 1973, together with costs and $3,500 attorney’s fees for services rendered by plaintiff’s attorney both in the trial court and in connection with this appeal as provided for in 12 O.S.1971 § 936.

Section 936 allows the prevailing party attorney fees in an action to recover for labor or services performed under a contract.

E. v. Cox Construction Co. v. Brookline Associates · filed 1979-12-20

We are sure Russell did not mean to suggest that an award of § 936 attorney’s fees to the prevailing party is precluded in cases where recovery is sought for labor or services performed pursuant to a contract relating to such labor or services.

Section 936 allows the prevailing party a reasonable attorney fee in an action to recover payment for professional services.

Oklahoma Orthopedic & Arthritis Foundation, Inc. v. Millstead · filed 1983-03-22

The trial court, according to plaintiff, awarded it an attorney’s fee on the authority of 12 O.S.1981 § 936, because plaintiff’s action was to recover for professional services. We believe this is a correct construction of § 936.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney fees in a retaliatory dismissal action because the action is not one to recover for labor or services.

Webb v. DAYTON TIRE & RUBBER CO. ETC. · filed 1985-03-04

A retaliatory dismissal suit is not an action to recover for labor or services within the meaning of 12 O.S.1981 § 936, as urged by Webb.

Section 936 applies to actions for labor or services rendered, but a claim for lost profits from breach of a related agreement does not necessarily qualify.

Burrows Construction Co. v. Independent School District No. 2 · filed 1985-07-16

If the action is brought for labor and services rendered, the provisions of section 936 apply. If the nature of the suit is for damages arising from the breach of an agreement relating to labor and services the provisions of this section do not necessarily apply.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney’s fees for a breach of contract suit seeking increased construction costs rather than payment for labor or services rendered.

Independent School District No. 4 of Rogers County v. Energy Conservation Engineering, Inc. · filed 1986-10-14

As such, the suit was for damages arising from the breach of the contracts and section 936 does not apply.

Section 936 allows the prevailing party a reasonable attorney fee in an action to collect payment for yellow pages advertising services.

Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. Parker Pest Control, Inc. · filed 1987-02-23

No argument is advanced that tends to convince us advertising is not a service. By this opinion we hold that it is. Nor is this a case arising from "an aspect collaterally relating to labor and service," as in Russell. It is simply a suit based on failure to pay for the service rendered, namely advertising. Our ruling in Burrows mandates that the opinion of the Court of Appeals be vacated and the telephone company allowed an attorneys' fee pursuant to § 936.

Section 936 allows attorney fees when damages arise directly from labor or services performed, including extra work required by a breach of contract.

Cook v. Oklahoma Board of Public Affairs · filed 1987-03-31

If the damage arises directly from the rendition of labor or services rather than from an aspect that relates collaterally to labor and services, the provisions of § 936 are applicable.

Section 936 permits attorney fees under its labor or services provision when the damages arise directly from providing those services, but not when the services are collateral to the claim.

ABC Coating Co. v. J. Harris & Sons Ltd. · filed 1987-12-16

Therefore, in each case it is the underlying nature of the suit itself which determines the applicability of the labor or services provisions of § 936. The question is whether the damages arose directly from the providing of labor or services, such as the failure to pay for those services, or from an aspect collaterally relating to labor or services.

Section 936 allows the prevailing party to recover reasonable attorney fees in a wrongful termination action on agency contracts that include labor and services.

Doyle v. Kelly · filed 1990-11-13

The subject of this lawsuit was the wrongful termination of the appellee under two agency contracts and those contracts included both labor and services.

Section 936 allows attorney fees for actions to recover money due for labor or services performed, but not for an action only collaterally related to those services.

Kay v. Venezuelan Sun Oil Co. · filed 1991-02-26

An assignment of an overriding royalty interest is not one of the contracts enumerated in § 936. The action below is only collaterally related to the agreement for labor and services. The district court was without authority to assess and award attorney fees under § 936 in this action and its order denying the motion for attorney fees is therefore affirmed.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney fees for a claim seeking the return of workover expenses that did not accrue under a contract.

LPCX CORP. v. Faulkner · filed 1991-05-14

Withrow’s action sought the return of workover expenses for the reason that those services were not accomplished and did not accrue in accordance with the provisions of the contract. As such, under the three cases last cited, the prevailing party, Withrow, is not entitled to an attorneys fee to be taxed as costs in the action.

Section 936 allows attorney fees when an insurance broker seeks payment for referring business because the referral is a service.

Horton Insurance Agency, Inc. v. Robinson · filed 1991-08-06

We find that Horton did provide a service to Robinson as defined in 12 O.S.1981 § 936. Attorney fees are allowed by Statute. Section 936 authorizes recovery of attorney fees where recovery is sought for labor or services, as in the case of failure to pay for them.

Section 936 authorizes attorney fees for claims arising directly from labor or services, such as an unpaid management fee, but not for claims only collaterally related to those services.

American Biomedical Group, Inc. v. Norman Regional Hospital Authority · filed 1993-04-27

We find only that part of this action relating to ABG’s claim for its “management fee” arises directly from the rendition of labor or services.

Section 936 allows attorney fees in an action to recover a real estate broker’s commission, even when the sale occurred without the broker’s assistance.

J. R. Fulton, D/B/A J. R. Fulton & Company v. L & N Consultants, Inc. · filed 1983-10-28

The award of attorney's fees is authorized by 12 O.S.1971 § 936 in actions for recovery of compensation "for labor or services," inter alia. ... We agree with the trial court that this action was one to recover for services of a real estate broker and that fees were recoverable, despite the provision for calculation of a fee if the property was sold without the broker's services.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney fees in a retaliatory dismissal suit because it is not an action to recover for labor or services.

Wallace v. Halliburton Co. · filed 1993-03-16

A retaliatory dismissal suit is not an action to recover for labor or services within the meaning of 12 O.S. 1981 § 936, as urged by Webb. ... The award of attorneys fees is reversed.

Section 936 allows attorney fees in an action to recover payment for services rendered.

Natkin & Co. v. Midwesco, Inc. · filed 1993-11-02

Because this action was one for failure to pay for services rendered, Natkin is entitled to attorneys’ fees under § 936.

Section 936 allows attorney fees for an action to recover for labor or services rendered, but not for damages arising from a failure to perform those services.

Hamilton v. Mueller · filed 1994-05-03

The underlying basis of this lawsuit, which alleges numerous causes of action, is “related to” a contract for labor or services. It is not an action to recover for labor or services rendered. Thus, under Russell v. Flanagan, 544 P.2d 510 (Okl.1975), and its progeny, attorney fees are not available to Appellees under § 936.

Section 936’s labor and services provision does not authorize attorney fees in an employment contract action that is not for labor or services rendered.

Wurth v. Oklahoma City University · filed 1995-06-27

The Oklahoma Supreme Court has held that the action must be one for labor or services rendered, which was not the case in this matter, (emphases ours).

Section 936 entitles the prevailing party to reasonable attorney fees on a contract claim for labor or services, including compensation for an employee’s intellectual work developing a cost-saving suggestion.

Edwards v. General Motors Assembly Division · filed 2002-11-19

We hold the trial court erred as a matter of law in ruling “Jeff Edwards’ suggestion as implemented by General Motors is not labor and services as [used in] Title 12 O.S. § 936,” and in denying Mr. Edwards an attorney fee under § 936. As the prevailing party on a contract claim for labor or service, Mr. Edwards is entitled to “a reasonable attorney fee to be set by the court, to be taxed and collected as costs” as mandated by § 936.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney fees for an appeal from an agency employment decision or an appeal from the denial of attorney fees because neither is an action to recover on a contract for labor or services.

Shackelford v. Oklahoma Military Department · filed 1996-03-01

And, similarly, neither OMD’s original appeal from the Commission order on the merits in favor of Appellee nor Appel-lee’s appeal from denial of his motion for attorney fees was an action to recover on a contract for labor or services, or an action to recover damages for willful or negligent injury to property, or an action for damages for injury to the person or to personal rights, or an action to recover unpaid wages.

Section 936 covers an action to recover drilling costs paid to third parties when the underlying suit seeks payment for labor or services rendered, even under invalid contracts.

Oneok, Inc. v. Ming · filed 1998-07-14

However, ONEOK’s underlying suit was brought to collect for labor or services owed to it under the aforementioned invalid contracts. The labor and services in this ease were the drilling expenses ONEOK paid and believed' to be owed to it by Mins-tar.

Section 936 permits the prevailing party to recover attorney’s fees in an action to recover drilling costs paid to third parties when the action is for labor or services.

Oneok, Inc. v. Ming · filed 1998-08-03

In a recently filed response, the Oklahoma Supreme Court answered the question affirmatively, under the facts presented. See Oneok, Inc. v. Ming , No. 89,288, 1998 WL 395057, at *1 (Okla. July 14, 1998). We accept the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s determination, and conclude defendant is entitled to attorney’s fees incurred in the district court and on appeal, see Aircraft Equip. Co. v. Kiowa Tribe , 921 P.2d 359, 362 (Okla. 1996).

Section 936 does not authorize attorney’s fees for collecting workers’ compensation group deficit premium assessments under a joint and several liability agreement when the servicing component is ancillary.

Durocher v. Nelson Stone Co. · filed 1998-11-20

Accordingly, suit upon the contract does not bring the successful party attorney’s fees under 12 O.S.1991 § 936 and the Trial Court committed no error in so holding.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney fees for claims concerning breach of an agency agreement and wrongful termination rather than recovery for labor or services.

Austin v. State Farm · filed 1999-04-09

The district court, citing Russell v. Flanagan, supra, held that Austin’s petition was not one for “labor or services,” and that, accordingly, Section 936 was inapplicable. We are not inclined to disturb the district court’s understanding of Oklahoma law. ... In this regard, we do not find the phrase “labor or services” mentioned anywhere in Austin’s petition. The core of Austin’s petition is his claim for an alleged breach of the agency agreement and his wrongful termination as an agent for State Farm.

Section 936 allows attorney fees for an action to recover on a note or negotiable instrument, but a claim merely related to one does not qualify.

Federal Financial Co. v. Grady County · filed 1999-09-13

FFC’s action was not an action to recover on a note or negotiable instrument. Certainly, this action was related to a note and a negotiable instrument, but that is not sufficient to invoke § 936.

Section 936 applies to an entire proceeding when the claims directly concern payment for services rendered or recovery of money paid for those services.

Pezold, Richey, Caruso & Barker v. Cherokee Nation Industries, Inc. · filed 2001-10-12

The claims directly related to the rendition of labor or services: the failure to pay for the services and the effort to recover money paid for services. Under these facts, § 936 applied to the entire proceeding.

Section 936 allows a prevailing well operator to recover reasonable attorney fees in an action for another participant’s share of drilling costs because those costs are for labor and services.

Chesapeake Operating, Inc. v. Valence Operating Co. · filed 1999-10-04

Because Chesapeake’s suit as the well operator for Valence’s proportionate share of drilling costs constituted an action to collect for the cost of labor and services, see ONEOK , 962 P.2d at 1287, we conclude Chesapeake is entitled to attorney fees incurred in the district court.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney fees on a contract for labor or services when no labor or services were actually furnished under the contract.

C & L Enterprises Inc. v. Citizen Band Potawatomi Tribe of Oklahoma · filed 2002-12-17

Further, Oklahoma law clearly prohibits an award of attorneys' fees under 12 O.S.2001 § 936 for nonpayment under a contract for labor or services where, as here, no labor or services were actually furnished under the contract.

Section 936 allows a prevailing party to recover reasonable attorney fees when the action seeks payment for labor or services rendered.

Bird Construction Co. v. Oklahoma City Housing Authority · filed 2004-09-07

Section 936 clearly applies and the trial court erred in denying Bird’s request for attorney fees thereunder.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney fees for a breach of a services contract when the suit seeks damages rather than payment for services rendered.

North American Specialty Insurance v. Britt Paulk Insurance Agency Inc. · filed 2010-11-04

It is clear that NAS’s suit was for Britt Paulk’s breach of a contract for the performance of labor or services, not an attempt to recover sums promised as payment for labor or services rendered. Accordingly, we cannot rely on § 936 to affirm the fee award.

Section 936 authorizes attorney fees for the prevailing party in an action to recover for labor or services rendered.

WINN-TECH, INC. v. LAWSON · filed 2017-04-21

By Winn-Tech's acceptance of Lawson's offer of judgment, Winn-Tech was the prevailing party. As such, Winn-Tech was entitled to attorney fees under both 12 O.S. §936 (actions to recover for labor or services rendered) and 42 O.S. §176 (actions to enforce liens).

Section 936(A) authorizes attorney fees for actions to recover for labor or services already rendered, but not for work that would have been performed in the future.

BRISCO v. STATE ex rel. BD. OF REGENTS AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGES · filed 2017-05-02(A)

The statute does not authorize fees in an action to recover for labor or services that are to be rendered in the future.

Section 936 entitles a party that prevails on a claim for labor or services to attorney’s fees from a surety liable for those services.

Builders Overhead Cranes v. NASHCO BUILDING COMPANY, INC. · filed 2003-09-04

In the present case, BOC commenced and prevailed on an action within the scope of § 936, and is entitled to § 936 prevailing party attorney’s fees. IFIC, as the defeated party liable to pay for BOC’s labor or services, is also liable to pay § 936 attorney’s fees to BOC.

Section 936 allows the prevailing party to recover attorney fees for defending a counterclaim seeking payment for services, but fees must be apportioned when a separate declaratory claim does not seek payment for services.

Stephenson v. Oneok Resources Co. · filed 2004-05-21

This statute applies in a breach of contract action only if the damages arose directly from the rendition of labor or services, such as a failure to pay for those services, but not if the damages arose from an aspect collaterally relating to labor and services, such as loss of profits on a contract involving the rendition of labor and services. ... The trial court erred in refusing to grant attorney fees pursuant to § 986 for Owners' defense of Operator's counterclaim. - It did not err in requiring apportionment of Owners' attorney fees, however. Owners' action for declaratory relief related to a contract for services but was not an action to recover for services. Therefore, Owners are not entitled to attorney fees pursuant to § 986 for prosecuting their claim for relief.

Section 936 permits a prevailing party to recover attorney fees when a claim concerning a note proceeds separately from the original foreclosure action because of bankruptcy proceedings.

Staton v. GUARANTEE STATE BANK OF MANGUM · filed 2007-12-07

The fact that two actions were involved rather than one does not preclude the application of section 936.

Section 936 allows attorney fees to the prevailing party in a separate action to recover unpaid receiver compensation for services, even if that compensation could have been taxed as costs in the underlying case.

Mitzner v. Poage · filed 2009-09-04

Section 936 expressly directs an award of attorney's fees to the prevailing party "[in any civil action to recover for labor or services rendered." Defendants prevailed on the Plaintiff's claim for unpaid receiver's compensation, and on their counter-claim to recover overpayments of receiver's compensation. The fact that, under § 619, Plaintiff's receiver's compensation could be taxed as a item of costs in the divorcee action of Defendant Poage and his spouse did not change the nature of Plaintiff's claim to something other than a claim to recover for labor or services rendered.

Section 936 allows the prevailing party to recover attorney’s fees when an action seeks payment for labor or services, even if the claim uses an equitable theory.

Maxxum Construction, Inc. v. First Commercial Bank · filed 2011-04-29

So, if the underlying nature of the suit is one to recover for unpaid labor or services rendered, § 936 authorizes an award of prevailing party attorney's fees, even though recovery is claimed under an equitable theory.

Section 936(A) does not award attorney fees when a dispute over a contract’s payment guidelines is only collaterally related to labor or services.

Integris Health, Inc. v. Insurance Co. of the State of Pennsylvania · filed 2014-07-08(A)

Therefore, following the directive of the Oklahoma Supreme Court to strictly apply § 936, e.g., Eagle Bluff, 237 P.3d at 180, we determine that ICOSP was not entitled to attorney fees under the statute.

Section 936 allows fees for the prevailing party in an action to collect payment for labor or services rendered, but not for an action to collect money owed under a financing transaction.

Insight Investments LLC v. North American Specialty Insurance Company · filed 2024-03-27(A)

Because fees under section 936 are available only to the prevailing party in an action to collect on labor or services rendered, and having awarded summary judgment to NASIC on the basis that Insight did not render labor or services, the Court may not properly conclude that NASIC is entitled to fees under that statutory provision.

Section 936 leaves the timing of a request and award of attorney’s fees to the trial judge’s discretion when no statute or court rule sets a deadline.

G. A. Mosites Co. of Fort Worth v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. · filed 1976-01-20

In the absence of a time limit set by statute or court rules, the time of asking for and the time of granting of attorney’s fees allowable under 12 O.S. § 936 must rest in the sound discretion of the trial judge.

Section 936 permits attorney fees in an action for labor or services to be taxed as costs ancillary to the judgment, including after a confessed judgment.

Williams & Kelley Architects v. Independent School District No. 1 · filed 1994-08-02

Costs — including, as here, attorney fees taxed as costs under 12 O.S.1991 § 936 in a civil action “for labor or services” — are not part of the judgment, but are merely ancillary to it.

Section 936 does not allow attorney’s fees in an action for mishandling a check, even when the damages sought equal the check’s amount, because the action is not to recover on the instrument.

Security Bank & Trust Co. v. Federal National Bank & Trust Co. of Shawnee · filed 1976-04-13

It is true the amount of damages sought is the amount of the check, which is the amount a payor bank is accountable for under 12A O.S.1971 § 4-302; however, it still is not a suit to recover on the check, but is to recover damages for the wrongful manner in which the check was allegedly handled by appellant. Thus, the cases cited in the briefs are distinguishably inapplicable. We therefore conclude the trial court erred in finding the action was within § 936 and in awarding appellee attorney’s fees.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney fees for an action based on a bank’s failure to meet its midnight deadline because that action is not a suit on the negotiable instrument.

Goodman v. Norman Bank of Commerce · filed 1977-06-07

Therefore, we view an action brought because of a bank’s failure to meet its midnight deadline as separate and distinct from an action on an instrument itself. Accordingly, we hold that the provisions of 12 O.S.1971 § 936 are inapplicable, and attorney fees are not awardable under that statute in an action based upon a bank’s failure to meet its midnight deadline.

Section 936 allows prevailing-party attorney fees in an action on a note against guarantors who unconditionally promised to pay it.

National Educators Life Insurance Co. v. Apache Lanes, Inc. · filed 1976-09-21

The statute expressly provides for attorney fees to the prevailing party in an action on a “note” which is involved in this action. The ap-pellees had unconditionally guaranteed payment of the note. Their guaranty, which was endorsed on the note itself, was a direct promise to pay the note. In such instances, we find the action on the note and contract of guaranty was covered by the statute.

Section 936 allows the successful party in a suit to collect a note to recover attorney fees.

Madill Bank and Trust Co. v. Herrmann · filed 1987-05-14

Additionally, 12 O.S.1981 § 936 provides for an award of attorneys fee to the successful party in suits for collection of notes.

Section 936 allows attorney fees in an action on a note, including an action involving a non-negotiable certificate of deposit.

Downing v. First Bank in Claremore · filed 1988-06-14

Since this statute allows recovery of attorneys fees for actions on a note, the trial court did not err in awarding them in this action.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney fees in an action to cancel a note because of an unauthorized alteration.

Borst v. Bright Mortgage Co. · filed 1991-11-26

We hold therefore, that 12 O.S.1981 § 936 does not allow for the award of attorney fees in an action for cancellation of a note due to an unauthorized alteration brought pursuant to 15 O.S.1981 § 239.

Section 936 allows prevailing guarantors to recover attorney fees when their agreements guarantee payment of a note involved in the action.

Cadle Co. v. Bianco · filed 1992-12-22

Section 936 allows an award of attorney fees to prevailing parties in actions on a “note” which is involved in this action. Herein guarantors “unconditionally guaranteed payment of the note.” Inclusive in their promise to pay “any and all liability or indebtedness” was a promise to pay the note.

Section 936(A) allows a reasonable attorney fee to a party who successfully defends an action to recover on a note.

Bank of Kremlin v. Davis · filed 2011-12-22(A)

Sue Mason is the prevailing party in Davis' proceeding to foreclose on the CNB note and the Oklahoma Supreme Court has previously allowed the award of attorney fees to parties who successfully defended on a note or other applicable instrument. As the prevailing party, she is allowed a reasonable attorney fee to be determined upon remand to the trial court, at which time the court can fully consider whether or not Sue Mason's motion is adequately supported.

Section 936 requires evidence of the value of an attorney’s services before a court may award fees; the judge’s experience alone is insufficient.

Bradford v. Plains Cotton Cooperative Association · filed 1976-08-11

Be that as it may, in Sarkeys v. Haas, Okl., 402 P.2d 894, 901, the Oklahoma Supreme Court held that under § 936 attorneys’ fees could not be awarded when “thé plaintiff neither submitted nor attempted to submit evidence concerning the value of his attorney’s services.” ... The experience of the court is no substitute for the evidence which Sarkeys v. Haas requires. The award of attorneys’ fees was improper.

Section 936 allows a prevailing party’s attorney’s fee award when the record gives the trial court enough evidence to determine a reasonable fee.

Metropolitan Electric Co. v. Mel-Jac Construction Co. · filed 1978-02-23

But it certainly does not furnish a basis for disturbing the attorney’s fee award here for the simple reason the record discloses that the trial judge had before him an abundance of evidence from which he — one who himself possessed expert knowledge of the value of lawyer services — could determine what at least a minimum attorney’s fee would amount to. In fixing a reasonable fee the court was required to consider the amount involved in the litigation, the intricacies of the facts and law of the case, the time spent and the results accomplished.

Section 936 authorizes a reasonable attorney fee for the prevailing party in an action on a contract for the sale of goods; the record must contain evidence supporting the fee’s reasonableness.

Darrow v. Spencer · filed 1978-07-18

Under the provisions of 12 O.S.1971 § 936, the prevailing party in an action to recover on a contract relating to the purchase or sale of goods, wares or merchandise, shall be awarded a reasonable attorney fee to be taxed and collected as costs. The trial court, in the case before us, had statutory authority to award a reasonable attorney fee. However, we have no way of discerning whether the attorney fee awarded below was a reasonable one, as there was no evidence in the record showing what attorney services were performed, nor was there evidence showing the value of any services performed.

Section 936 entitles the prevailing party to a reasonable attorney’s fee, but the fee award requires evidence of the value of the attorney’s services.

RST Service Manufacturing, Inc. v. Musselwhite · filed 1981-04-21

Appellant, as the prevailing party, is entitled to a reasonable attorney’s fee (12 O.S. 1971, § 936) but there is no evidence in the record of the value of the services.

Section 936 permits attorney fees to include charges for substantive work by law clerks and legal assistants.

Taylor v. Chubb Group of Ins. Companies · filed 1994-05-10

For the reasons set forth in this opinion, we reject the conclusion of the Court of Appeals in R.J.B. Gas Pipeline Co. v. Colorado Interstate Gas Co., 813 P.2d 14, 26 (Okla. App. 1990). There, the Court of Appeals held that attorney fees may not be awarded under 12 O.S. 1981 § 936 to include charges for law clerks and legal assistants.

Section 936 requires a reasonable attorney fee for the prevailing party in a contract case; the court must allow an evidentiary hearing before denying the request entirely, and the award covers only charges attributable to contract claims.

Continental Trend Resources, Inc. v. OXY Usa Inc. · filed 1995-01-12

But the Oklahoma law speaks in mandatory language. Therefore, we hold that it was an abuse of discretion to deny all attorney’s fees without holding an evidentiary hearing allowing plaintiffs to explain their claims. We remand for a determination by the district court of reasonable attorney’s fees as required by the Oklahoma statute. It is axiomatic, of course, that “reasonable fees” include only those charges attributable to the contract claims.

Section 936 does not require a fee applicant to prove the amount its client actually paid.

Meuers Law Firm, P.L. v. Reasor's, LLC · filed 2020-09-25

Further, Reasor’s provides no authority to substantiate its claim that § 936 requires Meuers to prove the amount of fees actually paid by its client.

Section 936 may authorize attorney fees for breach of an implied warranty; § 939 does not categorically exclude those claims.

Hardesty v. Andro Corporation-Webster Division · filed 1976-10-05

We do not expand § 939 into an expression of legislative intent of limitation on § 936 so as to make § 936 never applicable in a breach of an implied warranty.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney fees in an action to enforce a security agreement when the underlying notes were discharged in bankruptcy.

First National Bank of Guthrie v. Brown · filed 1978-05-23

Although it is argued that the suit below was a suit on a note, it was in fact a suit to enforce a security agreement. Indeed, the suit could hardly be based upon the notes, as the notes were discharged in bankruptcy proceedings. The fact that proof of the notes’ existence and default upon them must be shown in the action to enforce the security agreement, does not, once the notes are discharged in bankruptcy, make the suit one on a note.

Section 936 allows attorney fees in covered contract actions but does not apply to a claim for conversion.

Olansen v. Texaco Inc. · filed 1978-10-24

The provisions of 12 O.S.1971, § 936, afford no support for Olansens’ contention. Admittedly, several minerals are “goods” within the meaning of § 936, supra, but the statute itself is restricted to awards of attorney fees in civil actions relating to contracts such as for the sale of goods. Olansens’ theory of recovery against Kerr-McGee was one sounding in tort for conversion which would render § 936, supra, inapplicable.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney fees for specific performance of a settlement agreement outside its enumerated contract categories.

Edwards v. Walden · filed 1979-05-22

We can only conclude that the settlement agreement, which was the subject of the prevailing cause of action, fails to qualify as one of these specifically enumerated contracts on which to base an award of attorney fees under section 936. Therefore, we hold that the appellee’s prevailing cause of action was not one falling within Section 936, supra, and that it was error to award her attorney fees.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney’s fees in an action on a contract for the sale of corporate common stock.

Rendezvous Trails of America, Inc. v. Ayers · filed 1980-06-05

The foundation for Rendezvous’ insistence on receiving payment of its attorney’s fees from Ayers is 12 O.S.1971 § 936. That statute, however, specifies the taxing of attorney’s fees as costs to the prevailing party in actions on “contract[s] relating to the purchase or sale of goods, wares, or merchandise, or for labor and services . .” It does not authorize such costs ... in an action on a contract for the sale of corporate common stock.

Section 936 allows the prevailing party attorney fees in a suit on a contract for the sale of goods, subject to the specific fee prohibition for certain consumer credit sales under 14A O.S. § 2-413.

Scheirman v. Coulter · filed 1980-10-24

There is an apparent conflict between 14A O.S. 1971 § 2-413, ... which prohibits the recovery of an attorney fee in a consumer credit sale of less than $1,000.00 where the credit service charge exceeds ten percent; 12 O.S. 1971 § 936 which permits recovery of attorney fees to the prevailing party on a contract involving the sales of wares; ... Involved in our case is a consumer credit sale. As such, we must apply the specific statute which prohibits allowance of attorney fees if the sale is less than one thousand dollars and the credit service charge exceeds ten percent.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney’s fees in an action to terminate or forfeit a real-property lease for waste.

Creekmore v. Redman Industries, Inc. · filed 1983-10-21

An action for termination or forfeiture of the instant lease agreement for waste clearly does not fall within § 936.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney fees for a dispute over a home construction and loan disbursement agreement when the action seeks neither recovery on a covered goods contract nor payment for labor or services performed.

Sevelin v. Van Meter · filed 1987-08-04

But even though we agree with defendant that we are dealing with an action ex contractu, we are unable to agree that it comes within the ambit of § 936 for two reasons: (1) Plaintiffs are not seeking to recover on the type of contract contemplated by § 936 as interpreted by the Oklahoma Supreme Court in Russell v. Flanagan, 544 P.2d 510, 512 (Okl.1975), namely, a “contract relating to the purchase or sale of goods, wares, or merchandise,” and (2) this action is not one by a party to recover for labor or services performed.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney’s fees in an action under the Surface Damages Act.

Beasley Oil Co. v. Nance · filed 1990-10-30

We also do not find that Appellees are entitled to attorney’s fees pursuant to 12 O.S.1981 § 936, the statute dealing with actions on accounts, bills and contracts.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney fees in a currency forfeiture action, even though the currency consists of bills or notes.

State ex rel. Oklahoma Department of Public Safety v. Five Thousand Eight Hundred Nine Dollars ($5,809.00) in United Sta · filed 1991-09-03

Despite the seized currency being “bills” or “notes” within some possible definitions, this action is clearly not one “on certain accounts, bills and contracts” as contemplated by § 936.

Section 936 permits a prevailing party to recover attorney fees on an implied warranty claim even when the party also prevails on a manufacturers’ products liability claim, for which fees are unavailable.

United General Insurance Co. v. Crane Carrier Co. · filed 1984-07-03

Thus, while the plaintiff cannot recover attorney fees on the products liability cause, he may do so on the warranty cause, provided that a cause of action for implied warranty remains a viable cause of action in light of our holding in Kirkland v. General Motors Corporation, Okl., 521 P.2d 1353 (1974). ... We therefore answer the first certified question in the affirmative.

Section 936 does not allow attorney’s fees for the breach of contract or common law fraud claims at issue.

Atkinson v. Anadarko Bank & Trust Co. · filed 1987-01-28

The district court correctly held that plaintiffs are not entitled to recover attorney’s fees under Oklahoma law, which the notes agree will provide the governing law. Oklahoma law states that attorney’s fees are not recoverable for breach of contract or common law fraud causes of action. Okla.Stat. tit. 12, § 936.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney’s fees for rescission of a contract, and the stock certificate at issue did not qualify as a negotiable instrument under the section.

Agosta v. Southwest Breeders, Inc. · filed 1991-02-12

Thus, the stock certificate does not constitute a negotiable instrument for purposes of Section 936. Furthermore, Agosta’s action was one for rescission of a contract, which is not the basis for recovery of attorney’s fees under Section 936.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney fees in an action for breach of a contract to sell real property.

Holbert v. Echeverria · filed 1987-10-20

Under the principle of expressio unius est exclusio alterius, § 936 is not available as a foundation for attorney’s fee recovery in actions for breach of contract to sell real property.

Section 936 does not authorize attorney fees for judicial review under Oklahoma’s Administrative Procedures Act when the action is not one to recover for labor or services.

Smith v. State ex rel. Department of Human Services · filed 1990-03-06

Contrary to appellee’s suggestion, 12 O.S.1981 § 936 does not authorize an award of attorney fees under Oklahoma’s Administrative Procedures Act, nor is this action one to recover for labor or services.