HB1562 amends the legislation creating Oklahoma business courts and narrows/clarifies the types of cases those courts may hear. The bill sets a minimum amount in controversy of $500,000 for certain damages actions and allows business court dockets, once created, to hear a broad range of business disputes filed on or after January 1, 2026, including matters under the UCC, corporate and LLC law, partnership law, securities law, trade secrets, derivative actions, internal affairs disputes, business torts, contract and fraud claims between businesses, technology and intellectual property licensing disputes, and commercial real property cases. It also gives business courts authority over certain complex cases and defines when a case is presumptively complex, such as antitrust, IP, securities, environmental, insurance coverage, construction defect, product liability, and mass tort matters.
At the same time, the bill expressly excludes a wide set of matters from business court jurisdiction, including consumer protection claims, governmental tort claims, guardianships, probate, residential landlord-tenant disputes, personal injury and wrongful death, domestic relations, foreclosures, ordinary consumer transactions, certain farming/ranching collection matters, and most royalty or mineral owner disputes unless all parties consent or the case is a class action. It also allows supplemental jurisdiction over related claims, with a mechanism for remand to district court if a party objects. The bill includes an emergency clause, meaning it would take effect immediately upon passage and approval.
The bill’s impact on state law is to refine the jurisdictional boundaries of Oklahoma’s new business court system and to channel high-value, complex commercial litigation into a specialized forum. It affects multiple titles of Oklahoma law by referencing and incorporating claims arising under corporate, partnership, securities, trade secret, arbitration, commercial code, and intellectual property statutes, while preserving district court jurisdiction over excluded categories and consumer-oriented matters. In practical terms, it is designed to centralize sophisticated business disputes and potentially improve consistency and efficiency in their resolution.
Overall sentiment appears generally favorable but not unanimous. The bill advanced with strong majorities in both chambers, including committee approvals and floor passage, suggesting broad support for creating a specialized business court framework. However, the recorded no votes at each stage indicate some concern or disagreement remained, likely around the scope of the court’s jurisdiction, the exclusion of certain claims, and the policy choice to create a separate forum for business litigation.
The main points of contention appear to be which disputes belong in business court and which should remain in district court. Potentially sensitive carve-outs include consumer claims, personal injury, domestic relations, foreclosure, farming and ranching collections, and royalty/mineral owner matters, as well as the inclusion of complex tort, IP, and securities cases. Supporters likely view the bill as a modernization and efficiency measure for commercial litigation, while opponents may worry about forum selection, access to justice, or the risk of shifting cases away from general jurisdiction courts.
HB1562 amends the business-court provisions in Oklahoma law to expand and clarify jurisdiction over commercial and complex litigation while excluding specified consumer, family, probate, governmental, and other non-business matters. It affects how cases are assigned and heard within the state court system, particularly for high-value business disputes and complex multi-party litigation, and it authorizes business courts to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over related claims in the same controversy.
The key disagreements likely concern the breadth of business court jurisdiction and the exclusion of certain categories of cases. Some lawmakers may have been concerned about moving too many disputes into a specialized court, while others may have objected to specific carve-outs or to the inclusion of complex tort, IP, securities, and commercial real property matters. The royalty/mineral owner exception, the treatment of consumer claims, and the handling of farming/ranching-related collections are also notable areas where interests may diverge.