Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1982

The court held that the surgeon’s demurrer to the evidence was properly sustained because the evidence did not establish that his prescription of Demerol was a proximate cause of the patient’s injuries, and the anesthesiologist’s later negligence was unforeseeable and supervening.

The Oklahoma Supreme Court dismissed the appeal because the appellants supplied no legally acceptable, authenticated record of the trial proceedings, leaving the court with only the clerk’s file.

The court held that the disciplinary proceeding was validly initiated despite the alleged defects in the clients’ complaints, because the Bar could investigate misconduct based on information received through its disciplinary bodies.