Current through Laws 2024, c. 453.
Rule 29 - PAUPER'S AFFIDAVITA. Any party making application to proceed in forma pauperis shall file a Form 99 with the Court and provide a copy thereof to all other parties in the proceeding. The Form 99 shall state the applicant's status and inability to pay fees and costs required under the Workers' Compensation Code.B. The Court shall set the party's Form 99 for prehearing conference before the assigned trial judge prior to any hearing on merits, giving notice to all other parties in the proceeding. Any party may file a Form 99 with an appeal to the Court en banc, as provided under 85 O.S., Section 340. The Form 99 shall be set for prehearing conference before the assigned trial judge before the appeal is docketed for oral argument.C. An appeal to the Court en banc of a trial judge's denial of pauper status shall be set before the Court en banc on a priority basis with payment of the cost of the appeal (including transcription and filing fee) being deferred pending resolution of the pauper status appeal. If denial of the pauper status is affirmed by the Court en banc, within twenty (20) days, the party either must seek appellate review of the denial before the Supreme Court or pay the filing fee for the appeal and the transcription costs of the same prior to the original, underlying appeal being set for hearing before the Court en banc. Failure to do either shall result in dismissal of the underlying appeal to the Court sitting en banc upon motion of the opposing party. Only one appeal fee is due because the pauper status appeal is part of the original, underlying appeal. If pauper status is found by the Court en banc, the deferred costs and fees shall be borne by the Workers' Compensation Court.Okla. Stat. tit. 85, § 29
Adopted by order of the Supreme Court, 1997 OK 130, eff. 11/1/1997; Amended by order of the Supreme Court, 2000 OK 13, eff. 4/15/2000; Renumbered from former Rule 58 and amended by order of the Supreme Court, 2006 OK 6, eff. 1/1/2006. Amended by order of the Supreme Court, 2012 OK 19, eff. 3/6/2012 .