Your case is unique, but you are not alone.

About 41,000 new cases are filed in U.S. courts every weekday. Behind each one is a person trying to understand what happens next. Here’s what the public record can tell you about this matter — and about the people deciding it.

  • Know your judge

    Every judge has a pattern — what they grant, what they deny, how they handle the kinds of motions your case will see.

  • Know your attorney

    See an attorney’s actual track record — case types, courts, and how they’ve performed in front of this judge before.

  • Know your court

    Every courthouse has its own rhythm — filing-to-resolution times, common dispositions, how often cases like yours settle.

Is this judge more likely to rule for the plaintiff or the defendant in cases of this type?

How has your attorney actually performed in front of this judge?

AICasePredict surfaces patterns from public court records. We don’t predict outcomes and we don’t recommend changing your attorney — that’s a conversation for you and them. We just show you what the record already says.

Full Analytics Report

  • Complete case narrative
  • Judge details and rulings
  • Case disposition and outcome
  • All docket entries
  • Related cases and filings
$20
One-time purchase
Photo of Oklahoma unified county

Court

Oklahoma unified county

Oklahoma

View Court Profile

Case Information

Filed 2021-08-06
Type Divorcepro Se
Docket 121 entries
Disposition Judgment
Photo of Hon. FRANKS, KYRA

Judge

Hon. FRANKS, KYRA

Washington County (OK)

Oklahoma

View Judge Profile

Docket Entries

  1. FILE AND ENTER PETITION(JAD)
  2. OKLAHOMA COURT INFORMATION SYSTEM FEE - EFFECTIVE 07/01/04
  3. LENGTHY TRIAL FUND (WITH ATTORNEY)
  4. OK COURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES
  5. 10% OF CASA TO COURT CLERK REVOLVING FUND
  6. OK COUNCIL ON JUDICIAL COMPLAINTS REVOLVING FUND
  7. 10% OF COJC TO COURT CLERK REVOLVING FUND
  8. COURTHOUSE SECURITY FEE
  9. 10% OF CHSC TO COURT CLERK REVOLVING FUND
  10. STATE JUDICIAL REV. FUND INTERPRETER & TRANSLATOR SERVICES
  11. 15% TO DISTRICT COURT REVOLVING FUND
  12. COURT CLERK PRESERVATION FUND
  13. SUMMONS,AND NOTICE OF TEMPORARY INJUCTION ISSD(MAILED
  14. CERTIFIED)
  15. CERT MAIL FEE
  16. CERT MAIL RECEIPT, RET'D SIGNED ILLEGIBLE 8-9-21 (SM)
  17. ANSWER TO PETITIONER'S PETITION FOR DISSOLUTION OF
  18. MARRIAGE AND COUNTER-PETITION FOR DISSOLUTION OF
  19. MARRIAGE (GP)
  20. CERT MAIL RET'D TO RESP UNCLAIMED; UNABLE TO FORWARD
  21. FIRST ATTEMPT TO MAIL ANSWER (SM)
  22. CERT MAIL RET'D TO RESP UNCLAIMED; SECOND ATTEMPT TO
  23. MAIL ANSWER (SM)
  24. ENTRY OF APPEARANCE AS COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER
  25. (B.CUNNINGHAM FOR PETIT) (SM)
  26. ENTRY OF APPEARANCE (C BARNARD FOR RESP) (SM)
  27. RESPONDENT'S APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY ORDER (SM)
  28. RESPONDENT'S APPLICATION FOR SUIT MONEY (SM)
  29. RESPONSE AND OBJECTION TO RESPONDENT'S APPLICATION FOR
  30. SUIT MONEY (KC)
  31. RESPONSE AND OBJECTION TO RESPONDENT'S APPLICATION FOR
  32. TEMPORARY ORDER (KC)
  33. PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN
  34. SUPPORT (KC)
  35. PETITIONER'S MOTION TO BIFURCATE PROCEEDINGS (KC)
  36. MOTION FOR HEARING (KC)
  37. ORDER FOR HEARING (2-25-22 @ 9:00 AM) (KC)
  38. ORDER SETTING HEARING (2-25-22 @ 9:00 AM) (KC)
  39. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE (KC)
  40. RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DISCOVERY
  41. RESPONSES (SM)
  42. ORDER SETTING HEARING (2/25/22 @ 9:00AM)(SM)
  43. RESPONSE AND OBJECTION TO RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO COMPEL
  44. PRODUCTION OF DISCOVERY RESPONSES (SM)
  45. CM:FRANKS BY BAILIFF HARPER-MATTER PASSED BY AGREEMENT
  46. TO 4.1.22 @ 9:00AM. (WG)
  47. CM:FRANKS-PETIT BY ATTY B CUNNINGHAM-RESP BY ATTY C
  48. BARNARD. PARTIES ORDERED TO MEDIATION. MATTER CONTINUED
  49. & PARTIES ORDERED BACK 6.8.22 @ 9:30AM. (WG)
  50. ORDER OF REFERRAL TO MEDIATION (6/8/22 @ 9:30AM)(SM)
  51. AGREED MUTUAL RESTRAINING ORDER (SM)
  52. RESPONDENT'S RESPONSE TO PETITIONER'S MOTION TO
  53. BIFURCATE PROCEEDINGS (SM)
  54. RESPONDENT'S RESPONSE TO PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR
  55. SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT (SM)
  56. PETITIONER'S MOTION TO ENFORCE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT OF
  57. BIFURCATED DECREE (SM)
  58. PETITIONER'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF HIS MOTION TO
  59. BIFURCATE PROCEEDINGS (SM)
  60. PETITIONER'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF HIS MOTION FOR SUMMARY
  61. JUDGMENT (SM)
  62. RESPONDENT'S RESPONSE TO PETITIONER'S MOTION TO
  63. ENFORCE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT OF BIFURCATED DECREE (SM)
  64. RESPONDENT'S APPLICATION FOR CONTEMPT CITATION (SM)
  65. CONTEMPT CITATION, ISSUED TO ATTY (6/8/22 @ 9:30AM)(SM)
  66. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE (SM)
  67. CM:FRANKS-PETIT W/ATTY B CUNNINGHAM-RESP W/ATTY C
  68. BARNARD. COUNSEL REQUESTS COURT REPORTER TODAY. COURT
  69. REPORTER NOT REQUESTED IN ADVANCE & NO REPORTER
  70. AVAILABLE AT THIS TIME. COUNSEL MEETS. BOTH COUNSEL
  71. AGREE TO PROCEED WITHOUT REPORTER. MOVES COURT TO RULE
  72. ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT WITH NO ADDITIONS OR
  73. ARGUMENT BY AGREEMENT. COUNSEL FOR BOTH PARTIES WILL
  74. STAND ON PLEADINGS. CRT GRANTS PETIT'S MOTION FOR
  75. SUMMARY JUDGMENT OVER OBJECTION. COUNSEL FOR PETIT
  76. REQUESTS CRT GRANT DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE FOR PURPOSE
  77. OF PETIT'S BUSINESS & RESERVE ALL OTHER ISSUES. RESP
  78. ARGUES URGENCY TO GRANT DISSOLUTION DOESN'T EXIST FOR
  79. PETIT'S BUSINESS DEALINGS. CRT FINDS NOT ENOUGH
  80. INFORMATION REGARDING PROPERTY/DEBT TO MAKE RULING &
  81. GRANT DISSOLUTION. DENIES MOTION TO BIFURCATE AT THIS
  82. TIME. CRT ADVISES PETIT OF RIGHTS & RANGE OF PUNISHMENT
  83. FOR INDIRECT CONTEMPT. PETIT PLEADS NOT GUILTY. WAIVES
  84. JURY TRIAL. MOVES TO CONSOLIDATE WITH MERITS. RESP
  85. OBJECTS. RESP MOVES CRT TO SUSTAIN MOTION FOR SUMMARY
  86. JUDGMENT. COUNSEL TO SUBMIT PROPOSED FINDINGS &
  87. CONCLUSIONS TO COURT BY 6.30.22 @ 5:00PM. CRT TO MAKE
  88. DECISION ON PROPOSED FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS BY 7.11.22
  89. @ 5:00PM. (WG)
  90. RESPONDENT'S PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
  91. OF LAW (SM)
  92. PETITIONER'S PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
  93. OF LAW (SM)
  94. ORDER FOR HEARING (8-12-22 @ 9:00AM)(SM)
  95. RESPONDENT'S SECOND MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF
  96. DISCOVERY RESPONSES (SM)
  97. CM:FRANKS- CRT EXTENDS DEADLINE FOR DECISION TO 7.19.22
  98. BY 5:00PM.
  99. CM:FRANKS-COURT ACCEPTS PETIT'S PROPOSED FINDINGS OF
  100. FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW. COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER TO
  101. PREPARE ORDER FOR COURT'S SIGNATURE REFLECTING SAME
  102. WITHIN 10 DAYS. (WG)
  103. CM:FRANKS-PETIT W/ATTY B CUNNINGHAM-RESP & COUNSEL C
  104. BARNARD WAIVE APPEARANCE. AGREED DECREE PRESENTED TO
  105. COURT FOR APPROVAL. PETIT IS SWORN & TESTIMONY HEARD.
  106. CRT GRANTS DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE BASED ON THE GROUNDS
  107. OF INCOMPATABILITY; PROVIDES FOR PROPERTY/DEBT
  108. DIVISION AS AGREED UPON. AGREED DECREE APPROVED &
  109. ENTERED BY THE CRT. (WG)
  110. AGREED DECREE OF DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE (SM)
  111. APPLICATION TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER (SM)
  112. ORDER ALLOWING WITHDRAWAL AS COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER (B
  113. CUNNINGHAM FOR PETIT)(SM)
  114. RESPONDENT'S REQUEST FOR STATUS CONFERENCE (SM)
  115. ORDER SETTTING STATUS CONFERENCE (2-17-23 @ 9:00AM)(SM)
  116. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE (KC)
  117. CM:FRANKS-PETIT DOES NOT APPEAR-RESP BY ATTY C BARNARD.
  118. POST-DECREE ORDER TO TRANSFER PROPERTY PRESENTED TO CRT.
  119. CRT EXECUTES SIGNATURE & ENTERS ORDER. (WG)
  120. AGREED ORDER FOR POST-DECREE PROPERTY EXCHANGE (SM)

See the patterns behind this case

The free view above tells you who’s in the room. The detailed reports below show how the room tends to behave — using the same public records lawyers quietly rely on before every hearing.

  • Judge Report

    How this judge has ruled in cases like yours — case mix, motion outcomes, and historical docket. Judges set the floor of what’s possible in your courtroom.

  • Attorney vs Judge Report

    Everything in the Judge Report, plus how your attorney has actually performed in front of this judge. Attorneys move you off the floor — or don’t.

One-time payment, no subscription. Reports describe past public court activity — they don’t predict outcomes and they aren’t legal advice.

Get Free Case Details

Enter your email to receive case information including parties, docket entries, and status updates.

By submitting you agree to our Privacy Policy.

Need this case removed? Enter your email above — the confirmation email includes a case removal link.

Legal Analytics Has Been Featured In

Featured in Forbes, Bloomberg, The New Yorker, Above The Law, American Bar Association, and more