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 2023-06-05
Type Set Aside Deed
Docket 65 entries

Parties

Plaintiff Wilsontonya
Defendant Sennettdustin successor Trustee first State Trust successor Trustee charles E. Nash Rev. Living Trust dustin And Monica Sennett Trust
Photo of Hon. Hogan, Mike

Judge

Hon. Hogan, Mike

McIntosh County (OK)

Oklahoma

View Judge Profile

Lawyers

Docket Entries

  2. OKLA. COURT INFORMATION SYSTEM
  3. LENGTHY TRIAL FUND
  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. F AND E ISSUING SUMMONS
  14. F AND E ISSUING SUMMONS
  15. NOTICE OF PENDENCY OF ACTION (LIS PENDENS)
  16. RETURNED GREEN CARD RECEIVED BY M. SENNETT 6-9-23
  17. MOTION TO AMEND PETITION
  18. RELEASE OF LIS PENDENS
  19. GREEN CARD FOR PROOF OF SERVICE SIGNED BY DAVID DRAPER
  20. ORDER FOR MOTION TO AMEND PETITION THE MOTION IS
  21. GRANTED AND THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS THEREFORE AMENDED.
  22. S/HOGAN
  23. AMENDED PETITION
  24. NOTICE OF PENDENCY OF ACTION (LIS PENDENS)
  25. ENTRY OF APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENTS
  26. ENTRY OF APPEARANCE AND RESERVATION OF TIME
  27. DEFENDANT FIRST STATE TRUST COMPANY'S ANSWER TO
  28. PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED PETITION
  29. MOTION TO DISMISS AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT
  30. PETITIONER'S OBJECTION TO RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO
  31. DISMISS WITH BRIEF IN SUPPORT.
  32. MOTION TO SET FOR PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE
  33. ORDER SETTING HEARING; MOTION TO SET FOR PRETRIAL CONFERENCE SET FOR 1/10/24 @ 9AM S/HOGAN
  34. CM 1/10/23 COMES ON FOR: PETITIONER'S MOTION TO SET FOR PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE. BLAKE LYNCH APPEARS ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF. JIM BLAND APPEARS ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT, DUSTIN SENNETT AND THE DUSTIN SENNETT AND MONICE SENNETT TRUST. BRETT CABLE APPEARS ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT, FIRST STATE TRUST COMPANY. RULING: THIS CASE IS CONSOLIDATED WITH PB-2022-204. PETITIONER'S MOTION TO SET FOR PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE IS STRICKEN AS MOOT. THIS CASE IS SET FOR STATUS ON FEBRUARY 28, 2024 AT 9:00 AM. THE PARTIES ARE COORDINATING DATES FOR TRIAL. S/HOGAN
  35. CM COMES ON FOR: SETTING OF CONSOLIDATED TRIAL. J. BLAND ANN. ON BEHALF OF PET./DEFT., DUSTIN SENNETT. RULING: BY AGREEMENT, THE CONSOLIDATED TRIAL IN THESE MATTERS IS SET FOR 4/23/24 @ 9AM S/HOGAN
  36. SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM (JAY OLMEDO)
  37. SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM (JOE MCCORMICK)
  38. NOTICE OF SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM (ALL COUNSEL)
  39. NOTICE OF SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM (ALL COUNSEL)
  40. CM COMES ON FOR RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION IN PB-22-204. STATUS. RESPONDENT, DUSTIN SENNETT'S, MOTION TO DISMISS & BREIF IN SUPPORT IN CV-23-129. COUNSEL FOR ALL PARTIES PRESENT.RULING: MATTERS ARE STRICKEN. S/HOGAN
  41. SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM; MCALESTER VA CLINIC S/HOGAN
  42. SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM; JACK C. MONTGOMERY S/HOGAN
  43. NOTICE OF SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM
  44. NOTICE OF SUPBOENA DUCES TECUM
  45. AMENDED SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM S/HOGAN
  46. AMENDED SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM S/HOGAN
  47. NOTICE OF AMENDED SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM
  48. NOTICE OF AMENDED SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM
  49. SUBPOENA; JOE MCCORMICK
  50. SUBPOENA; JAY OLMEDO
  51. NOTICE OF SUBPOENA
  52. NOTICE OF SUBPOENA
  53. CM 4-23-24, COMES ON FOR: TRIAL. COUNSEL FOR ALL PARTIES PRESENT. RULING: DUE TO COURTHOUSE HVAC/SMOKE ISSUES, THE TRIAL IS RESET TO JULY 16, 2024 AT 9AM. S/HOGAN
  54. SUBPOENA (JAY OLMEDO)
  55. SUBPOENA (JOE MCCORMICK)
  56. NOTICE OF SUBPOENA
  57. NOTICE OF SUBPOENA
  58. PRE-TRIAL ORDER S/HOGAN
  59. RETURN OF SUBPOENA FOR (JOE MCCORMICK) SIGNED GREEN CARD CERTIFIED MAIL, RECEIVED 6-17-24.
  60. RETURN OF SUBPOENA FOR (JAY OLMEDO) SIGNED GREEN CARD CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIVED.
  61. CASE CONSOLIDATED WITH CV-23-129 & PB-22-204 CM 7-16-24, COMES ON FOR: TRIAL. ALL PARTIES AND COUNSEL FOR SAME APPEAR. RULE OF SEQUESTRATION IS INVOKED. TESTIMONY TAKEN RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF CALLS JAY OLMEDA. DIRECT EXAMINATION. RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT D IS ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION. RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT E IS ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION. RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT F IS ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION. RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT G IS ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION. RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT I IS ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION. RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT J IS ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION. RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT K & L IS ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION. RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT T IS ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION. RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT U IS ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION. CROSS EXAMINATION. RE-DIRECT. RE-CROSS RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF CALLS JOSEPH MCCORMICK. DIRECT EXAMINATION. RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT A IS ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION. RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT B IS ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION. RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT C IS ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION. RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT H IS ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION. RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT'S M1 & M2 IS ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION. RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT N IS ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION. RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT O1 & O2 IS ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION. RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT P IS ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION. RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT Q IS ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION. RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT R IS ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION. RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT BB IS ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION. CROSS EXAMINATION. PETITIONER/DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT 2 IS ADMITTED WITHOUT OBJECTION. PETITIONER/DEFENDENT CALLS DR. MARK RUBERTUS. DIRECT EXAMINATION. CROSS EXAMINATION. RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF'S CALLS TERRY HARRISON. DIRECT EXAMINATION. CROSS EXAMINATION. MR. LYNCH CALLS PETITIONER/PLAINTFIFF, TONYA WILSON. DIRECT EXAMINATION. CROSS EXAMINATION. RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF RESTS. PETITIONER/DEFENDANT DEMURRERS. RULING: THE COURT SPECIFICALLY FINDS THE DECEDENT WAS COMPETENT AT THE TIME OF EXECUTING DOCUMENTS. THE COURT FINDS THAT THERE IS A VALID TRUST AND THE WILL IS VALID. THE COURT DOES NOT FIND UNDUE INFLUENCE. MR. BLAND IS ORDERED TO PREPARE AND SUBMIT THE ORDER IN COMPLIANCE WITH 12 O.S. § 696.2. THE ORDER IS TO INCLUDE ANY ASSETS OR PROPERTY TO BE DISPERSED IN CONNECTION WITH PB-22-204. ALL EXHIBITS ARE WITHDRAWN AND ARE BACK IN THE POSSESSION OF COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES. S/JUDGE HOGAN
  62. PB-22-204-LETTERS TESTAMENTARY (DUSTIN NASH) PER. REP... S/HOGAN
  63. ORDER ADMITTING THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF CHARLES E. NASH TO PROBATE, AND FINAL ORDER DENYING RELIEF REQUESTED IN PETITIONER TONYA WILSON'S "AMENDED PETITION" S/HOGAN
  64. RELEASE OF LIS PENDENS

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