The Oklahoma Supreme Court exercised its original jurisdiction to issue extraordinary writs against Grady County District Court Judge Kory Kirkland in a dispute involving Cactus Drilling Company LLC and individual plaintiffs James and Maria Faulkner. The court's Feb. 9, 2026, order blocks enforcement of a September 11, 2025 judgment and mandates complete dismissal of the case.
In *Cactus Drilling Co. LLC v. The Honorable Kory Kirkland* (2026 OK 7), the state's high court issued both a writ of prohibition and a writ of mandamus - two of the most powerful judicial remedies available for correcting lower court actions. The writ of prohibition bars Judge Kirkland, or any other assigned judge, from enforcing the September 2025 Journal Entry of Judgment in the underlying case *James B. Faulkner and Maria Faulkner v. Cactus Drilling Company, LLC*, No. CJ-2021-175.
Simultaneously, the Supreme Court issued a writ of mandamus ordering the district court to dismiss all claims brought by the Faulkners against Cactus Drilling Company. This combination of writs effectively ends the litigation in favor of the drilling company.
The case stems from a 2021 filing in Grady County District Court, where James B. Faulkner and Maria Faulkner sued Cactus Drilling Company LLC, an Oklahoma limited liability company. The underlying dispute appears to involve multiple parties, including The Crosby Group, Diamondback Holdings LLC, Casey McConnell, and Matt McKinley, though the Supreme Court's order focuses specifically on the claims against Cactus Drilling.
The Oklahoma Supreme Court's decision to exercise original jurisdiction under Article VII, Section 4 of the Oklahoma Constitution demonstrates the exceptional nature of this case. Original jurisdiction allows the Supreme Court to hear certain cases directly rather than on appeal, typically reserved for matters involving state officials or cases of statewide importance.
A writ of prohibition is an extraordinary remedy used to prevent a lower court from acting beyond its jurisdiction or authority. By issuing this writ, the Supreme Court determined that Judge Kirkland lacked proper authority to enter or enforce the September 2025 judgment. This type of intervention is rare and signals significant concerns about the lower court's handling of the case.
The companion writ of mandamus compels specific action from a government official - in this case, requiring the district court to dismiss the Faulkners' claims entirely. Mandamus relief is typically granted only when there is a clear legal duty to act and no other adequate remedy exists.
The Supreme Court's order provides limited detail about the underlying facts that led to this extraordinary intervention. The case file indicates the dispute began in 2019 when James B. Faulkner took some action that presumably gave rise to the litigation, though the specific nature of the conflict remains unclear from the available court documents.
Cactus Drilling Company LLC successfully petitioned the Supreme Court for relief from whatever judgment or order was entered in September 2025. The company argued that the district court exceeded its authority, prompting the high court's intervention.
The multiple defendants and parties involved suggest a complex business dispute that may have involved drilling operations, partnerships, or contractual relationships in the oil and gas industry. Grady County, located in central Oklahoma, has significant oil and gas activity, making such disputes relatively common in the region.
The timing of the Supreme Court's intervention is notable, coming approximately five months after the September 2025 judgment. This suggests that Cactus Drilling moved quickly to challenge the lower court's ruling through the extraordinary writ process rather than pursuing a traditional appeal.
The case serves as a reminder of the Oklahoma Supreme Court's supervisory authority over lower courts and its willingness to intervene when district courts allegedly exceed their jurisdiction. The combination of prohibition and mandamus writs represents one of the strongest forms of judicial correction available.
For the Faulkners, the Supreme Court's order represents a complete legal defeat, with their claims not only rejected but ordered dismissed by the state's highest court. The finality of the mandamus order suggests limited options for further legal recourse.
The decision also highlights the importance of procedural compliance and jurisdictional limits in Oklahoma state courts. When courts act beyond their authority, the Supreme Court stands ready to intervene through the extraordinary writ process.
This case demonstrates how the extraordinary writ jurisdiction can provide swift resolution to disputes over lower court authority, potentially saving parties from prolonged litigation when jurisdictional issues are clear-cut. The Oklahoma Supreme Court's decisive action effectively ends what could have been years of continued proceedings in Grady County District Court.