597 P.2d 1223, 1225 (Okla.Ct.App.1979) (same), cert. denied (Okla. July 16, 1979); Restatement (Second) of Agency § 220 cmt. c (1957) (same). In rare cases, the evidence may be so one-sided as to allow resolution of the employment-status issue as a matter of law. See Frankle, 234 Minn. at 51, 47 N.W.2d at 489 (adopting this approach, but limiting its application to circumstances in which the underlying facts are undisputed and support only one inference); Ledoux v. Joncas, 163 Minn. 498, 500-01, 204 N.W. 635, 636-37 (1925) (affirming an employment-status decision as a matter of law because “whether there is any evidence tending to support a given finding, and whether the evidence conclusively establishes a particular fact, are questions of law”); see also Santiago, 794 P.2d at 141 (<HOLDING>); Fleming, 139 Cal.Rptr. at 581 (same);
holding that law of the case acts as a bar only when the issue in question was actually considered and decided by the first court holding that it may be decided as a matter of law recognizing that where material facts are undisputed the court only decides the application of relevant law holding that whether proximate cause exists is to be decided in a common sense fashion in the light of the attending facts and circumstances and unless the facts are undisputed and admit of but one inference the question is for the jury recognizing the issue may be decided as a question of law if the facts are undisputed and support only one inference