Sherbert v. City of Ada, 352 P.3d 1196

City of Ada passed Ordinance No. 13-02 to annex territory in Pontotoc County; nearby landowners (petitioners) challenged the annexation for defective notice under 11 O.S. § 21-103(B)(2).
Statute requires mailing notice by first-class mail to owners within the territory and to owners abutting public rights-of-way, but mandates certified mail for any owner of a parcel of five acres or more used for agricultural purposes.
City sent certified mail to owners within the annexed territory and first-class mail to certain abutting agricultural owners; at least one abutting agricultural owner (Plumlee) testified he received no notice.
Trial court found the statute ambiguous, concluded substantial compliance and actual notice suffice, and denied relief; the trial court certified the interlocutory order for immediate appeal.
The Supreme Court reviewed de novo whether strict compliance with the certified-mail requirement was required and whether the annexation ordinance must be set aside for noncompliance.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether 11 O.S. § 21-103(B)(2) requires strict certified-mail notice to owners of ≥5-acre agricultural parcels (including those abutting annexation boundaries) and whether substantial compliance or actual notice is sufficient	Petitioners: statute mandates certified mail to every owner of ≥5 acres used for agriculture (including abutting owners); failure to send certified mail to such owners (one owner received no notice) voids annexation	City of Ada: statute ambiguous; substantial compliance and actual notice should be sufficient; practical no difference between first-class and certified as to recipients	Court: statutory language and legislative intent require strict compliance for certified-mail notice to the specified agricultural owners; substantial compliance is not enough; trial court reversed and annexation ordinance invalidated

State ex rel. W.A. "Drew" Edmondson v. Native Wholesale Supply, 237 P.3d 199 (Okla. 2010) (standard of review for statutory interpretation; de novo review)
City of Seminole v. In re De-Annexation of Certain Real Property from the City of Seminole, 102 P.3d 120 (Okla. 2004) (municipal annexation power is legislative and municipalities must follow state law)
Garcia v. Ted Parks, L.L.C., 195 P.3d 1269 (Okla. 2008) (failure to comply with statutory notice can deprive a government actor of jurisdiction; defective notice may render action void)
Jones v. Oklahoma City, 250 P.2d 17 (Okla. 1952) (annexation ordinances must recite jurisdictional facts and may be collaterally attacked if they do not)
In the Matter of the De-Annexation of Certain Real Property, 662 P.2d 187 (Okla. 1983) (judicial role is limited to determining whether annexation complied with law and was reasonable)