IN RE: AMENDMENT OF RULE 15 OF THE RULES FOR DISTRICT COURTS OF OKLAHOMA (2026)

ORDER

¶1 Pursuant to the general administrative authority that Article VII, Section 6 of the Oklahoma Constitution vests in this Court over all courts of this State except the Court on the Judiciary and the Senate sitting as a Court of Impeachment, as well as this Court's statutory authority pursuant to 12 O.S.2025, § 74 to make rules applicable to the district courts for carrying into effect the Code of Civil Procedure of the State of Oklahoma, the Court hereby adopts the attached amendment to Rule 15 of the Rules for District Courts of Oklahoma, 12 O.S.2025, ch. 2, app.

¶2 A clean copy of the amended rule is attached as “Exhibit A,” and a red-lined copy is attached as “Exhibit B.”

¶3 The amended rule shall be effective June 1, 2026.

¶ 4 DONE BY ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT IN CONFERENCE THIS 6TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026.

In re: AMENDMENT OF RULE 15 OF THE RULES FOR DISTRICT COURTS OF OKLAHOMA, 12 O.S.2025, CH. 2, APP.

CORRECTION ORDER

¶1 The wrong versions of “Exhibit A” and “Exhibit B” were inadvertently attached to the previous Order amending Rule 15 of the Rules for District Courts of Oklahoma. Those exhibits are hereby stricken, and the corrected versions attached hereto are substituted in their place, to become effective June 1, 2026.

¶ 2 DONE BY ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT IN CONFERENCE THIS 6TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026.

ALL JUSTICES CONCUR.

“EXHIBIT A”

Rules for District Courts of Oklahoma

Chapter 2, App.

Rule 15. Disqualification or Recusal of Judges in Civil and Criminal Cases.

a. Before filing any motion to disqualify or recuse a trial judge for any of the reasons set forth in 20 O.S.2025, § 1401, in the common law, or in Rule 2.11 of the Code of Judicial Conduct, 5 O.S.2025, ch. 1, app. 4, an in camera request shall first be made to the judge to disqualify. Such in camera request shall not be made ex parte. If such in camera request is not satisfactorily resolved, a motion to disqualify the judge may be filed pursuant to 20 O.S.2025, § 1403, provided such motion is not being filed less than ten (10) days before the case is set for trial. Such motion must be filed within ten (10) days of the judge's denial of the in camera request. A copy of the motion shall be delivered to the judge's chambers. Until such time as the formal motion is filed, the assigned judge may proceed with the case.

b. Any interested party who deems himself aggrieved by the refusal of a judge to grant a motion to disqualify may re-present his motion to the Chief Judge of the county in which the cause is pending or, if the disqualification of a Chief Judge is sought, to the Presiding Judge of the judicial administrative district by filing a motion for rehearing within five (5) days from the date of said refusal.

1. A copy of the motion for rehearing shall be mailed or delivered to the Chief Judge or Presiding Judge, to the adverse party, and to the judge who entered the original order.

2. If the rehearing before the second judge results in an order adverse to the movant, the movant shall be granted not more than five (5) days to institute a proceeding in the Supreme Court or the Court of Criminal Appeals for a writ of mandamus. See Rule 10.6(B), R. of Ct. Crim. App. 22 O.S.2025, ch. 18, app.

3. Neither the Supreme Court nor the Court of Criminal Appeals will entertain an original proceeding to disqualify a judge unless it is shown that movant seeking disqualification timely complied with all the previous requirements of this rule.

4. If the rehearing before the second judge results in an order favorable to the movant, such order may not be reviewed by appeal or other method.

c. An original proceeding in mandamus to disqualify or recuse a judge in a civil action or proceeding shall be brought in the Supreme Court. An original proceeding in mandamus to disqualify or recuse a judge in a criminal case or proceeding shall be brought in the Court of Criminal Appeals. If mandamus is not brought in the appellate court designated as proper by this rule, the case will be transferred to the proper court either on motion or sua sponte. Okla. Const. art. VII, § 4.

d. When an interested party has filed a formal motion for a judge to disqualify or recuse, the judge cannot proceed with the case until the disqualification stands overruled of record. Miller Dollarhide, P.C. v. Tal, 2007 OK 58, 163 P.3d 548. “Overruled of record” means when the interested party's request to disqualify or recuse has been denied at each and every stage (i.e., by the judge, by the Chief Judge or Presiding Judge, and by the appellate court) or when the deadline for the interested party to seek further review under Rule 15(a)--(c) has expired (i.e., when the interested party has failed to file a motion to disqualify under subsection (a), a motion for rehearing under subsection (b), or an original proceeding under subsection (c) before the applicable deadline has passed). Nothing in this rule shall prevent another judge from proceeding forward with the case, pending resolution of the requested disqualification or recusal of the subject judge.

e. No judge who is either recused or disqualified shall participate in the selection of the successor judge to the case. Rule 9, R. on Admin. of Cts., 20 O.S.2025, ch. 1, app. 2.

f. In a civil proceeding, sanctions for the filing of a frivolous motion to disqualify or recuse a judge may be invoked against the party filing such motion in favor of the party required to defend against it (including a real party in interest). A frivolous motion may include one brought for the sole purpose of delay or to disrupt the proceeding or a motion so obviously without any merit as to impute bad faith on the party seeking disqualification or recusal. Where the filing of a motion is in good faith, sanctions will not be imposed. 12 O.S.2025, § 2011.

g. In a civil proceeding, the date of the filing of an order prepared in conformance with 12 O.S.2025, §§ 696.2 and 696.3 commences the running of the time periods as prescribed in this rule. In computing such time periods, the first day shall be excluded and the last included to complete the period. Intermediate legal holidays and any other day when the office of the county court clerk or the Appellate Court Clerk does not remain open for business until the regularly scheduled closing time shall be excluded from the computation. See 12 O.S.2025, § 2006(A)(1). The additional time of three (3) days granted by the “mailbox rule” in 12 O.S.2025, § 2006(D) is not applicable to the time periods as prescribed in this rule.

h. In a criminal proceeding, the running of the time periods prescribed in this rule is triggered on the date an order is pronounced or the date an order is filed of record, whichever occurs first. In computing such time periods, the first day shall be excluded and the last included to complete the period. See Rule 1.4, R. of Ct. Crim. App., 22 O.S.2025, ch. 18, app. The Court of Criminal Appeals has adopted the calendar day computation of time limits, as opposed to the business-day computation of time limits. See Meyer v. Engle, 2016 OK CR 1, ¶ 8, 369 P.3d 37, 39; see also Pitts v. State, 2003 OK CR 21, ¶ 9, 78 P.3d 551, 554 (finding 12 O.S.2001, § 2006 inapplicable to criminal proceedings based upon explicit language of 12 O.S.2011, § 2001 that limits the Pleading Code's applicability to “suits of a civil nature”). Consequently, intermediate legal holidays and weekends are not excluded from the computation. But see Rule 1.5, R. of Ct. Crim. App., 22 O.S.2025, ch. 18, app. (“When any filing deadline falls on a day when the Clerk's office is closed, the filing due date will be on the next day that the Clerk's office is open for the performance of public business.”).

Historical Data

Amended by Order of the Supreme Court, Okl. Dec. 510--512 P.2d XXXV, eff. September 1, 1973 (adopting Rule 15); Amended by Order of the Supreme Court, Okl. Dec. 520--522 P.2d XXXVII, effective June 1, 1974 (adopting Rule 15.1); Amended by Order of the Supreme Court, Okl. Dec. 633--637 P.2d LX, eff. January 1, 1982 (combining and revising Rules 15 and 15.1); Amended by Order of the Supreme Court, 2024 OK 79, eff. November 18, 2024 (superseded document available); Amended by Order of the Supreme Court, 2026 OK 21, eff. June 1, 2026 (superseded document available).

“EXHIBIT B”

Rules for District Courts of Oklahoma Chapter 2, App.

Rule 15. Disqualification or Recusal of Judges in Civil and Criminal Cases.

a. Before filing any motion to disqualify or recuse a_ trial judge for any of the reasons set forth in 20 O.S.2025, § 1401, in the common law, or in Rule 2 of the Code of Judicial Conduct, 5 O.S.2025, ch. 1, app. 4, an in camera request shall first be made to the judge to disqualify or to transfer the cause to another judge. Such in camera request shall not be made ex parte. If such in camera request is not satisfactorily resolved, not less than ten (10) days before the case is set for trial a motion to disqualify a the _judge or to transfer a cause to another judge may be filed pursuant to 20 O.S.2025, § 1403, provided such motion is not being filed less than ten (10) days before the case is set for trial. Such motion must be filed within ten (10) days of the judge's denial of the in camera request. and aA copy of the motion shall be delivered to the judge’s chambers. Until such time as the formal motion is filed, the assigned judge may proceed with the case.

b. Any interested party who deems himself aggrieved by the refusal of a judge to grant a motion to disqualify or transfer a cause to another judge may re-present his motion to the Chief Judge of the county in which the cause is pending or, if the disqualification of a Chief Judge is sought, to the Presiding Judge of the judicial administrative district by filing in the case a motion for rehearing within five (5) days from the date of said refusal a written request for re-hearing.

1. A copy of the requestmotion for rehearing shall be mailed or delivered to the Chief Judge or Presiding Judge, to the adverse party, and to the judge who entered the original order.

2. If the rehearing before the second judge results in an order adverse to the movant, the movant shall be granted not more than five (5) days to institute a proceeding in the Supreme Court or the Court of Criminal Appeals for a writ of mandamus. See Rule 10.6(B), R. of Ct. Crim. App., 22 O.S.2025, ch. 18, app.

3. _Neither the Supreme Court nor the Court of Criminal Appeals will entertain an original proceeding to disqualify a judge or to direct a judge to transfer a cause to another judge unless it is shown that the relief sought was previously denied by the judge to whom the matter was re-presented in accordance movant seeking disqualification timely complied with all the previous requirements of this rule.

4. If the rehearing before the second judge results in Aan order favorable to the movanting party, such order may not be reviewed by appeal or other method.

c. An original proceeding in mandamus to disqualify or recuse a judge in a civil action or proceeding shall be brought in the Supreme Court;. Aan original proceeding in mandamus to disqualify or recuse a judge in a criminal case or proceeding shall be brought in the Court of Criminal Appeals. If mandamus is not brought in the appellate court designated as proper by this rule, the case will be transferred to the proper court either on motion or sua sponte. Okla. Const. Aart. VII, § 4 Okla. Const.

d. When an interested party has filed a formal motion for a judge to disqualify or recuse, the judge cannot proceed with the case until the disqualification stands overruled of record following a party's compliance with this rule. Miller Dollarhide, P.C. v. Tal, 2007 OK 58, 163 P.3d 548. “Overruled of record” occurs means when the interested party's request to disqualify or recuse has been denied at each and every stage (i.e., by the judge, by the Chief Judge or Presiding Judge, and_ by the appellate court) or when the deadline time for the interested party to seek further review under complete Rule 15(a)--(c) has expired (i.e., when the interested party has failed to file a motion to disqualify under subsection (a), a motion for rehearing under subsection (b), or an original proceeding under subsection (c) before the applicable deadline has passed). Nothing in this rule shall prevent another judge from proceeding forward with the case, pending resolution of the requested disqualification or recusal of the subject judge.

e. No judge who is either recused or disqualified shall participate in the selection of the successor judge to the case. Rules on Administration of Courts, Rule 9, R. on Admin. of Cts., 20 O.S.2025, ch. 1, app. 2.

f. In a civil proceeding, sanctions for the filing of a frivolous motion to disqualify or recuse a judge or recuse may be invoked against the party filing such motion in favor of the party required to defend against it (including a real party in interest). A frivolous motion may include one brought for the sole purpose of delay or to disrupt the proceeding or a motion so obviously without any merit as to impute bad faith on the party seeking disqualification or recusal. Where the filing of a motion is in good faith, sanctions will not be imposed. 12 O.S.2025, § 2011.

g. In a civil proceeding, the date of the filing of an order prepared in conformance with 12 O.S.2025, §§ 696.2 and 696.3 commences the running of the time periods as prescribed in this rule. In computing such time periods, the first day shall be excluded and the last included to complete the period. Intermediate legal holidays and any other day when the office of the county court clerk or the Appellate Court Clerk does not remain open for business until the regularly scheduled closing time shall be excluded from the computation.See12 O.S.2025, § 2006(A)(1). The additional time of three (3) days granted by the “mailbox rule” in 12 O.S.2025, § 2006(D) is not applicable to the time periods as prescribed in this rule.

h. In a criminal proceeding, the running of the time periods prescribed in this rule is triggered on the date an order is pronounced or the date an order is filed of record, whichever occurs first. In computing such time periods, the first day shall be excluded and the last included to complete the period. See Rule 1.4, R. of Ct. Crim. App., 22 O.S.2025, ch. 18, app. The Court of Criminal Appeals has adopted the calendar day computation of time limits, as opposed to the business-day computation of time limits. See Meyer v. Engle, 2016 OK CR 1, ¶ 8, 369 P.3d 37, 39; see also Pitts v. State, 2003 OK CR 21, ¶ 9, 78 P.3d 551, 554 (finding 12 O.S.2001, § 2006 inapplicable to criminal proceedings based upon explicit language of 12 O.S.2011, § 2001_ that limits the Pleading Code's applicability to “suits of a civil nature”). Consequently, intermediate legal holidays and weekends are not excluded from the computation. But see Rule 1.5, R. of Ct. Crim. App., 22 O.S.2025, ch. 18, app. (“When any filing deadline falls on a day when the Clerk's office is closed, the filing due date will be on the next day that the Clerk's office is open for the performance of public business.”).

Historical Data

Amended by Order of the Supreme Court, Okl. Dec. 510--512 P.2d XXXV, eff. September 1, 1973 (adopting Rule 15); Amended by Order of the Supreme Court, Okl. Dec. 520--522 P.2d XXXVII, effective June 1, 1974 (adopting Rule 15.1); Amended by Order of the Supreme Court, Okl. Dec. 633--637 P.2d LX, eff. January 1, 1982 (combining and revising Rules 15 and 15.1); Amended by Order of the Supreme Court, 2024 OK 79, eff. November 18, 2024 (superseded document available); Amended by Order of the Supreme Court, 2026 OK 21, eff. June 1, 2026 (superseded document available).

ALL JUSTICES CONCUR.