Boller v. Key Bank: An Alarming Use of Brendale v. Yakima
|
|
- Amice Marshall
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1
2 Copyright 1993 by National Clearinghouse for Legal Services, Inc. All rights reserved. 27 Clearinghouse Review 884 (December 1993) Boller v. Key Bank: An Alarming Use of Brendale v. Yakima By Andrew W. Baldwin Andrew W. Baldwin is currently a contract attorney with Wind River Legal Services, P.O. Box 247, Fort Washakie, WY 82514, (307) ; his private practice emphasizes federal Indian law. He was formerly in-house counsel and director of the Office of Tribal Attorney, Northern Arapaho Tribe, and director of Wind River Legal Services. Copyright 1993 Andrew W. Baldwin. I. Introduction Most legal services' clients living or working on Indian reservations rely upon the rights, privileges, and protections provided by tribal law and tribal courts. Of obvious importance are tribal protections regarding foreclosures, garnishments, attachments, and other forms of execution by judgment creditors. The Shoshone and Arapaho Tribes of Wyoming, for example, have special rules for executions of judgments including (1) exemptions that are more expansive than Wyoming law; (2) rules encouraging informal repayment agreements; and (3) rules that prevent executions within 60 days of the entry of judgment. /1/ Also unlike Wyoming law, tribal law prohibits self-help repossessions and declares void all contract provisions to the contrary. /2/ A recent Wyoming Supreme Court case, Boller v. Key Bank, however, radically expanded the scope of exclusive state court jurisdiction over foreclosures of Indian lands (and probably other forms of property execution) on the reservation. /3/ Of concern to advocates across the country is the court's unique approach to federal law governing the scope of tribal jurisdiction. In Boller, an enrolled member of the Shoshone Tribe of the Wind River Indian Reservation executed a mortgage on certain real property, owned by him in fee simple, to secure a note held by Key Bank, which is located outside of the reservation. /4/ The land Mr. Boller mortgaged was formerly held by the United States in trust for him. In 1978, a fee patent to the land was issued in Mr. Boller's name pursuant to the General Allotment Act of /5/ When Mr. Boller defaulted on his note, the bank sought to foreclose in state court pursuant to state law. Mr. Boller objected, arguing that the Shoshone and Arapaho Tribal Court had exclusive jurisdiction over the foreclosure. The Wyoming Supreme Court held that the state trial court had exclusive jurisdiction over the foreclosure and that state law applied. The court's opinion relied on (1) the General Allotment Act; (2) a characterization of the area of land involved as "open" under
3 Brendale v. Confederated Tribes and Bands of Yakima Indian Nation; /6/ (3) the impact of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling on the interests of the Shoshone and Arapaho Tribes under Brendale; (4) actions of Mr. Boller that the court said waived tribal court jurisdiction; and (5) distinguishing aspects of the Wyoming Supreme Court's earlier jurisdictional ruling in Wyoming ex rel. Peterson v. District Court. /7/ A critical analysis of Boller reveals significant flaws in the rationale expressed in the majority opinion. /8/ Of particular concern is the court's interpretation and application of Brendale and its analysis of tribal interests. The Boller court's rationale regarding Brendale could affect the scope of tribal court jurisdiction in a wide range of cases, including those to which the General Allotment Act does not apply. II. "Open" versus "Closed" Areas of the Reservation In Brendale, a divided U.S. Supreme Court held that Yakima County could zone non- Indian lands in the "open" portion of the Yakima Reservation but that the county could not regulate non-indian land use in the "closed" portion of the reservation. /9/ In Boller, the Wyoming Supreme Court concluded that Mr. Boller's land was similar to the "open" area described in Brendale and, therefore, was subject to exclusive state jurisdiction for the following three reasons. /10/ A. Physical Character of the Land First, the Wyoming Supreme Court relied on the fact that Mr. Boller's land was "used primarily for livestock grazing and rural homesites." /11/ In another section of the opinion, the Boller court reinforced its reliance on the physical similarities between the "open" area in Brendale and the area where Mr. Boller's property was located on the Wind River Reservation, saying "the land is 'open,' i.e., it and surrounding land are being used primarily for grazing and rural homesites in which there is other fee patented land in the area." /12/ While it is certainly true that in Brendale the Supreme Court described the "open" land on the Yakima Reservation as "primarily rangeland, [and] agricultural land," the Court's distinction did not rest upon the physical characteristics of the land in question. "The closed area is so named because it has been closed to the general public.... Access to the open area, as its name suggests, is not likewise restricted to the general public." /13/ The Boller court's reliance on the physical character of an area to determine the scope of state court jurisdiction to foreclose on lands in that area is astounding. Under such an approach, the heavily wooded lands of the tribes in Wisconsin would be forever "closed" to state jurisdiction, while the arid lands of the southwestern pueblos would lose all semblance of tribal control because they are primarily "open." /14/
4 B. Landowner "Access" versus "Public Access" Second, the Boller court relied on the fact that "[a]ccess to appellant's land from U.S. Highway 287 (approximately one mile) is entirely over fee patented land, part of which is a housing tract subdivision." /15/ While it is true that the landowner in Brendale had access to his property, the U.S. Supreme Court did not rely on that fact in deciding the scope of the county's zoning authority in the "open" area. If the Court had relied on it, then the county could not have zoned specific parcels within the "open" area anytime the owners of those tracts developed access problems. Rather, the important factor in Brendale was that access to the lands was over public roads and thoroughfares, which helped make the area more open to the public. Obviously, when the Court said "public," it meant "non-indian public." If access to one's land determines the scope of a state court's jurisdiction to foreclose upon it, few reservation lands, if any, will be subject to tribal court jurisdiction. Further, jurisdiction for each foreclosure must be determined on a tract-by-tract basis, depending upon whether a landowner has access to the parcel. Exclusive jurisdiction over the same parcel of land could change if access problems develop or disappear from year to year. If future rulings extend the logic of Boller to permit states to condemn fee lands in "open" areas in order to create or preserve access to other lands (whether Indian or non-indian owned), an "access problem" may in fact never arise. In other words, inroads into tribal jurisdiction could proceed tract-by-tract until all areas of all reservations are forcibly "opened" to state jurisdiction, a result contrary to federal treaties, law, and policy. Again, the Boller court said that access to Mr. Boller's land is "approximately one mile" from the public highway and "is entirely over fee patented land." /16/ Access to Mr. Boller's lands depended not upon public thoroughfares but upon access across lands of other private owners "through an easement agreement." /17/ However, private easements do not provide "public" access. /18/ Under Wyoming law, a "public" road is one that the public generally, not merely a portion of the public, is privileged to use. /19/ The Wyoming Supreme Court has also cited with approval cases holding that the existence of a state ("public") highway through an Indian reservation does not affect the jurisdiction of the tribe in that area. /20/ Therefore, when the Boller court refers to the "public" nature of the area in Brendale, and speaks in terms of "access" to Mr. Boller's property, the court is actually saying that "private, non-indian access" helps make an area "open" to exclusive state jurisdiction. Because there is in fact no "public" access to Mr. Boller's lands, the court could not have correctly relied on the portion of Brendale that discusses public access to and through an "open" area. To the extent that the Boller court relies on the existence of "private, non- Indian access" to lands to determine the court's jurisdiction to foreclose on those lands, the court's logic is without precedent.
5 C. Sale of Adjacent Tracts to Non-Indians Finally, the Wyoming Supreme Court notes that "Appellant's sale of 40 acres of his fee patented land was to a non-indian." /21/ As noted earlier, the "closed" portion of the Yakima Reservation was not open to the general public, while the "open" area was generally accessible to the public. Sale of an adjacent parcel of one's land to another private person hardly renders it or the surrounding area "open" to the general public. The importance of this sale to the Wyoming Supreme Court appears rooted in the court's notion that private, non-indian access or land ownership can make an area "open" to exclusive state jurisdiction over Indian lands. Without additional factors, such as public access, Brendale does not even support this proposition with respect to non-indian lands. III. Impact on Tribal Interests The Wyoming Supreme Court also relies on portions of the Brendale decision regarding the protectable interests of a tribe in regulating land use on its reservation. Brendale held that a tribe's interest "does not entitle the tribe to complain or obtain relief against every use of fee land that has some adverse effect on the tribe. The impact must be demonstrably serious and must imperil the political integrity, the economic security, or the health and welfare of the tribe." /22/ The court in Boller correctly pointed out that the state court foreclosure did not involve any change of use of Mr. Boller's lands. While the Court recognized that "[t]here may be instances in which a change of ownership would have sufficient impact to entitle a tribe to relief, such impact is not indicated here." /23/ The court also pointed out that the Shoshone Tribe "has not here indicated any concern over the change in ownership." /24/ It is unfortunate that the Shoshone Tribe did not become involved in the case, either as a party or as amicus curie. The court speculates about the nature of the tribe's interest in the case, if any had been expressed, stating, "Of course, the tribe would probably refrain from asserting jurisdiction in this case in any event for fear of creating an obstacle to the granting of mortgage loans to tribal members by banks. If it made an appearance, it would likely be on the side of appellee [Key Bank]." /25/ The Boller Court's analysis of tribal interests is flawed for several reasons. A. The Tribe's Interest in Foreclosures of Reservation Indian Lands In Brendale, the Yakima Tribe argued that its treaty-based power to exclude non-indians from its reservation necessarily included the power to zone the use of non-indian land. The court rejected this argument on the ground that the General Allotment Act prevents a tribe from excluding non-indians from their own property. /26/ Mr. Boller's land was also
6 allotted under the General Allotment Act, but he is an enrolled member of the tribe. A tribe's legitimate interest in regulation and protection of its members is assumed to be much broader than it is with respect to non-indians. /27/ Unfortunately, the Boller decision does not address this important distinction from the facts in Brendale. In determining the tribe's interest in regulating foreclosures of Indian-owned lands on the reservation, the Wyoming Supreme Court should start with the tribes' public enactments. The Wind River Tribal Code provides that tribal courts "shall have jurisdiction over any real or personal property located on the reservation to determine the ownership thereof or rights therein," subject to any contrary federal law. /28/ If the tribe has any interest in the case, it certainly seems heightened by the ruling that state court has exclusive rather than concurrent jurisdiction over the foreclosure. The Tribal Law and Order Code also declares a policy of broad civil jurisdiction: It is hereby declared as a matter of tribal policy and legislative determination, that the public and tribal interests demand that the tribes provide all individuals living within the Wind River Indian Reservation with an effective means of redress for both civil and criminal conflicts against members, non-enrolled members, and other persons who through their residence, presence, business dealings, other acts or failures to act, or other significant minimum contacts with this reservation and/or its residents... incur civil obligations to persons or entities entitled to the tribes' protection. /29/ In addition, the Code provides that tribal jurisdiction "shall extend to the territory within the Wind River Indian Reservation." /30/ Finally, the Code declares personal civil jurisdiction over "[a]ny person who transacts, conducts, or performs any business or activity within the reservation, either in person or by an agent or representative." /31/ It seems worth noting that the Tribal Code does not establish "open" and "closed" areas of the Wind River Reservation; it does not distinguish between areas it does and does not regulate. The Code also does not limit its authority over foreclosures to land held in trust by the United States for tribal members. /32/ The court in Boller speculates that the tribe's interest in land ownership is less than its interest in regulating the use of the land itself. This may be true with respect to the tribe's interest in environmental protection or land use regulation. However, Boller relied heavily on the physical character of the land involved and the presence of non-indian-owned fee land to determine that Mr. Boller's land was "open" under Brendale. It is this very approach which makes land ownership a vital interest to the tribes. The loss of jurisdiction over mortgage foreclosures under Boller is a legitimate concern of the tribe because loss of that jurisdiction can lead to loss of jurisdiction over land use under a Brendale analysis.
7 Viewing the question of protectable governmental interests from another angle may be helpful. In other words, it is important to know what interest the state of Wyoming has in obtaining jurisdiction over foreclosures of Indian-owned fee lands on the reservation. However that interest is defined, the tribe has a similar, competing interest. Whatever the Wyoming Supreme Court may say about the scope of the tribes' jurisdiction as declared in the Tribal Code, it seems apparent that the tribes have a valid governmental interest in the scope of their civil jurisdiction over Indian lands located on the reservation. B. Federal Recognition of the Tribe's Interest In addition to the legislatively declared interest of the tribes, the United States has also recognized a tribe's interest in executions against property of tribal members located on their reservations. Federal law has specifically prevented on-reservation executions of judgments issued by state courts, even when the state court clearly had jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter of the dispute. The parties did not brief, and the Boller court did not address, this additional line of authority. Felix Cohen, author of a leading treatise on Indian law, concludes that when "execution to satisfy an off-reservation judgment against an Indian is sought, a state court and sheriff cannot seize Indian property within a self-governing reservation." /33/ He also notes that "[w]hen the parties are Indians, tribal courts have exclusive jurisdiction. When a non- Indian brings an action against an Indian and the action arises in Indian country, the rule of exclusive tribal jurisdiction also normally applies." /34/ State officials have no power to execute or otherwise enforce state court judgments on an Indian reservation, even when state court jurisdiction to adjudicate the rights of the parties is unquestioned. /35/ In Annis v. Dewey County Bank, an Indian sought to enjoin Dewey County Bank from enforcing its state court judgment against him on the reservation. The bank argued that the county sheriff could seize the plaintiff's livestock because all of the following occurred off of the reservation: (1) the plaintiff's signing of the security agreement; (2) the plaintiff's breach of the agreement; and (3) service of state court process. Furthermore, the tribal council had approved the specific security agreement used by the parties. Nonetheless, the court in Annis rejected the bank's argument because it "fails to recognize that the actual attachment by state officials must be made on the reservation and state officials have no jurisdiction on Indian reservations." /36/ Provision for the assumption of state civil jurisdiction over Indian country is made in 25 U.S.C. Sec. 1322(a) and (b). /37/ Only "strict compliance" with 25 U.S.C. Secs et seq. can allow state attachment processes to reach property of an Indian on the reservation. /38/ The Tenth Circuit has ruled that New Mexico state courts have no jurisdiction to garnish or otherwise attach wages due to a reservation Indian and in possession of his non-indian, on-reservation employer. /39/ In Joe v. Marcum, the circuit court decided that "to allow the present garnishment proceeding to stand would impinge upon tribal sovereignty." /40/
8 The same Navajo treaty examined and relied upon in Joe has been described by the Wyoming Supreme Court as "virtually identical" to the Shoshone treaty. /41/ The court in Joe noted that the Navajo Tribal Code provided its own methods of postjudgment enforcement. /42/ Similarly, the Shoshone and Arapaho Tribes have provided for postjudgment enforcement proceedings, including recognition of foreign judgments. Indeed, the Tribal Code provides a comprehensive system of debtor and creditor rights and obligations, including rules for prejudgment attachment, dishonored checks, executions and foreclosures on real and personal property, executions on unsecured property (including exemptions), garnishment, and replevin. /43/ C. Tribal Support for State Jurisdiction The Boller court states confidently, "Of course, the [Shoshone] tribe would probably refrain from asserting jurisdiction in this case in any event for fear of creating an obstacle to the granting of mortgage loans to tribal members by banks." /44/ The Tenth Circuit has rejected precisely the kind of second-guessing engaged in by the Boller court. In Bank of Oklahoma v. Muscogee (Creek) Nation, the bank argued "that commercial relations between Indian tribes and non-indian banks will be chilled if the district court's dismissal [in deference to tribal court proceedings] is affirmed." /45/ The court held that "this policy argument precisely misses the point of sovereign immunity, which is the power of self-determination. We decline the Bank's invitation to second-guess the wisdom of the [Creek] Nation's business decisions under the guise of judicial review." /46/ In addition, the Boller court's conclusion assumes that at least the following premises are true: Off-reservation banks are the sole or primary source of loans to tribal members. Offreservation lenders are not always the sole source of credit to tribal members. The Shoshone Tribe has long maintained both a loan guarantee and a direct lending program for tribal members. In addition, Bureau of Indian Affairs loan programs have been available to tribal members, including loans for the purchase of homes. /47/ Tribal law does not adequately protect the interests of lenders. As noted earlier, the Tribal Code provides for foreclosures of secured interests in real property on the reservation. /48/ Additionally, the Code permits recognition of foreign judgments, including judgments from state courts. /49/ Clearly, off-reservation creditors have specific rights and remedies under tribal law. Lenders would not loan funds to tribal members unless they could foreclose through state court proceedings or pursuant to state law. The concerns and decisions of lenders like Key Bank, the effects of those decisions on credit availability on the reservation, and the tribe's policies in that regard are speculative. As noted, the Tenth
9 Circuit declined "the Bank's invitation to second-guess the wisdom of [tribal]... business decisions under the guise of judicial review." /50/ If the Shoshone Tribe weighed the interests of the tribe and all of its members against the needs of some of its members for off-reservation credit, it would forgo the assertion of jurisdiction over foreclosures of fee lands on the reservation. One need only review the jurisdictional provisions of the Tribal Code to detect the danger in relying on this premise. IV. Conclusion The Wyoming Supreme Court has misread and misapplied the ruling in Brendale, invoking an approach that could eviscerate federal law regarding tribal sovereignty. Brendale did not rely on the physical character of the lands in question to determine whether they were "open" to state jurisdiction; Boller did. Brendale emphasized the existence of public thoroughfares in the open area; Boller accepted a private easement agreement as the equivalent of public access. Brendale permitted Yakima County to zone non-indian land use in the open area; Boller upheld exclusive state court jurisdiction to foreclose upon Indian land. Boller might be limited to situations involving off-reservation creditors and lands allotted under the General Allotment Act. However, the Court's analysis of open areas and tribal interests under Brendale would leave few Indian fee lands, if any, under tribal control. Land ownership patterns on a reservation can cost a tribe its jurisdiction to regulate non- Indian land use under Brendale. Under the Boller approach, tribes could also lose jurisdiction to regulate debtor and creditor rights of tribal members on Indian fee lands as well. In addition, if the logic used in Boller is extended to allow states to condemn Indianowned fee lands in "open" areas in order to create private, non-indian access to other lands, there will indeed be no limit to the amount of fee land owned by tribal members that a state court can ultimately control. Boller is a bold attempt to create broad state jurisdiction over Indian country and tribal members to the exclusion of tribal courts and tribal law. Advocates should be aware of this attempt and the potential danger it poses to the rights and remedies available to our clients. footnotes /1/ The Shoshone and Arapaho Law and Order Code [hereinafter S&A LOC], Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 35(3), prohibits the seizure and sale of property of the judgment debtor if it would "create an immediate substantive hardship on the immediate family of the judgment debtor." Several specific categories and values of property that mirror
10 Wyoming's are presumed to create such a hardship. S&A LOC, Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 35(1), encourages agreements; Wyoming has no comparable provision. /2/ S&A LOC Sec (1)(a). /3/ Boller v. Key Bank, 829 P.2d 260 (Wyo. 1992). /4/ The ruling in Boller applies only to lands held in fee status, as opposed to lands held in trust by the United States for the benefit of the Indian owner. Separate rules and issues apply to executions on trust property. /5/ General Allotment Act of 1887, 25 U.S.C. Secs , 339, , 348, 349, 354, 381. /6/ Brendale v. Confederated Tribes & Bands of Yakima Indian Nation, 492 U.S. 408 (1989). /7/ Wyoming ex rel. Peterson v. District Court, 617 P.2d 1056 (1980). /8/ A complete analysis of all points discussed or relied upon by the court in Boller is beyond the scope of this article. /9/ The Chief Justice and Justices Byron R. White, Antonin Scalia, and Anthony M. Kennedy joined the opinion with respect to the "open" area and Justices John Paul Stevens and Sandra Day O'Connor concurred in the result in a separate opinion. Justices Harry A. Blackmun, Walter J. Brennan, Jr., and Thurgood Marshall joined the opinion with respect to the "closed" area, and Justices Stevens and O'Connor concurred in the result in a separate opinion. /10/ Boller, 829 P.2d at 262. /11/ Id. /12/ Id. at /13/ Brendale, 492 U.S. at /14/ Under this approach, reforestation might become a leading strategy among tribes seeking to protect their authority to determine real property rights among their members and non-indians on their reservations. /15/ Boller, 829 P.2d at 262. /16/ Id.
11 /17/ Id. at The Boller court does not say that appellant was estopped from arguing his jurisdictional points because he earlier tried to obtain access to his lands pursuant to state condemnation law. /18/ See WYO. STAT. Secs et seq., regarding the establishment of private roads. /19/ McGuire v. McGuire, 608 P.2d 1278 (Wyo. 1980). /20/ Peterson, 617 P.2d at /21/ Boller, 829 P.2d at 262. The Boller court does not say that appellant was estopped from arguing his jurisdictional points because he earlier sold part of his lands to non- Indians. /22/ Brendale, 492 U.S. at 431 (cited in Boller at ). /23/ Boller, 829 P.2d at 263. /24/ Id. /25/ Id. /26/ Brendale, 492 U.S. at /27/ "When the parties are Indians, tribal courts have exclusive jurisdiction. When a non- Indian brings an action against an Indian and the action arises in Indian country, the rule of exclusive tribal jurisdiction also normally applies." FELIX COHEN, HANDBOOK OF FEDERAL INDIAN LAW 342 (citations omitted). /28/ S&A LOC Sec The phrase "subject to any contrary... federal laws" adds nothing to an analysis of the tribe's interest under the Brendale approach. Both the tribe and the state are subject to the supremacy of federal law. /29/ S&A LOC Sec , Jurisdiction-Tribal Policy (emphasis added). /30/ Id. Sec , Territorial Jurisdiction. /31/ Id. Sec , Personal Jurisdiction. /32/ Tribal courts have jurisdiction over foreclosures of mortgages on Indian trust lands, and the law of the tribe applies to such foreclosures, 25 U.S.C. Sec. 483a. See Northwest S.D. Prod. Credit Ass'n v. Smith, 784 F.2d 323, 326 (8th Cir. 1986). /33/ COHEN, supra note 27, at 359.
12 /34/ Id. at 342. /35/ Annis v. Dewey County Bank, 335 F. Supp. 133 (D.S.D. 1971). /36/ Id. at 136. /37/ Wyoming has not enacted legislation to assume such jurisdiction over the Shoshone and Arapaho Tribes; nor have the tribes consented to the same. /38/ Annis, 335 F. Supp. at 136. /39/ Joe v. Markham, 621 F.2d 358 (10th Cir. 1980). /40/ Id. at 361. /41/ Peterson, 617 P.2d at /42/ Joe, 621 F.2d at 361. /43/ See Title II, Rule 35, of the Rules of Civil Procedure, and Title XIV of the S&A LOC. /44/ Boller, 829 P.2d at 263. /45/ Bank of Okla. v. Muscogee (Creek) Nations, 972 F.2d 1166 (10th Cir. 1992). /46/ Id. at /47/ See 25 C.F.R. pts. 101, 103. /48/ S&A LOC Secs et seq. /49/ Id. Secs et seq. /50/ Bank of Okla., 972 F.2d at 1166.
PUBLISH TENTH CIRCUIT. Plaintiffs-Appellees, No
PUBLISH FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit September 19, 2007 Elisabeth A. Shumaker UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Clerk of Court TENTH CIRCUIT MINER ELECTRIC, INC.; RUSSELL E. MINER, v.
More informationNORTHERN ARAPAHO CODE TITLE 11. SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY
NORTHERN ARAPAHO CODE TITLE 11. SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY Section 101 Authority and Citation 102 Definitions 103 Reference to Code Includes Amendments 104 Severability 105 Effective Date of Code 106 Repeal of
More informationReleased for Publication August 4, COUNSEL JUDGES
1 TEMPEST RECOVERY SERVICES, INC. V. BELONE, 2003-NMSC-019, 134 N.M. 133, 74 P.3d 67 TEMPEST RECOVERY SERVICES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LEONARD BELONE, Defendant-Appellant. Docket No. 27,749 SUPREME
More informationCase ABA Doc 10 Filed 02/10/16 Entered 02/10/16 14:10:34 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 6
Document Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY Caption in Compliance with D.N.J. LBR 9004-1(b) McCARTER & ENGLISH, LLP Kate R. Buck 100 Mulberry Street Four Gateway Center Newark,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA BILLINGS DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case 1:16-cv-00011-BMM Document 45 Filed 03/29/16 Page 1 of 12 Mark A. Echo Hawk (pro hac vice ECHO HAWK & OLSEN, PLLC 505 Pershing Ave., Suite 100 PO Box 6119 Pocatello, Idaho 83205-6119 Phone: (208 478-1624
More informationNos and (Consolidated) UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT. STATE OF WYOMING, and WYOMING FARM BUREAU FEDERATION,
Appellate Case: 14-9512 Document: 01019414647 Date Filed: 04/13/2015 Page: 1 Nos. 14-9512 and 14-9514 (Consolidated) UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT STATE OF WYOMING, and WYOMING FARM
More informationCase 1:09-cv GJQ-HWB Doc #39 Filed 12/19/13 Page 1 of 12 Page ID#565 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
Case 1:09-cv-01015-GJQ-HWB Doc #39 Filed 12/19/13 Page 1 of 12 Page ID#565 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORBERT J. KELSEY, Petitioner, Case No. 09-CV-1015-GJQ-HWB
More informationINDIAN COUNTRY: COURTS SPLIT ON TEST AND OUTCOME. The community of reference analysis creates complication and uncertainty
INDIAN COUNTRY: COURTS SPLIT ON TEST AND OUTCOME The community of reference analysis creates complication and uncertainty Brian Nichols Overview In two recent decisions, state and federal courts in New
More informationSupreme Court of the United States
No. 17-387 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States UPPER SKAGIT INDIAN TRIBE, v. Petitioner, SHARLINE LUNDGREN AND RAY LUNDGREN, Respondents. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT
More informationNatural Resources Journal
Natural Resources Journal 32 Nat Resources J. 1 (Historical Analysis and Water Resources Development) Winter 1992 Tribes v. States: Zoning Indian Reservations J. Bart Wright Recommended Citation J. B.
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT. Plaintiff and Appellant, Intervener and Respondent
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT STAND UP FOR CALIFORNIA!, v. Plaintiff and Appellant, Case No. F069302 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., Defendants, Cross-Defendants
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON. Plaintiff,
Case :-cv-0 ECF No. filed /0/ PageID. Page of Ethan Jones, WSBA No. Yakama Nation Office of Legal Counsel (0) - ethan@yakamanation-olc.org Joe Sexton, WSBA No. 0 Galanda Broadman PLLC 0 th Ave NE, Suite
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN. v. Case No. 14-CV-876 DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN FELIX J. BRUETTE, JR., Plaintiff, v. Case No. 14-CV-876 SALLY JEWELL, Secretary of the Interior, Defendant, VALERIE J. BRUETTE, IVAN D. BRUETTE,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA BILLINGS DIVISION
Case 1:16-cv-00011-BMM Document 175 Filed 06/23/17 Page 1 of 22 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA BILLINGS DIVISION NORTHERN ARAPAHO TRIBE, for itself and as parens patriea,
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MARGARET A. APAO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. THE BANK OF NEW YORK, as Trustee for Amresco Residential Securities Corporation Mortgage No.
More informationCase 5:15-cv RDR-KGS Document 1 Filed 03/09/15 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
Case 5:15-cv-04857-RDR-KGS Document 1 Filed 03/09/15 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS STATE OF KANSAS, ex rel. DEREK SCHMIDT Attorney General, State of Kansas
More informationCase 2:13-cv DB Document 2 Filed 12/03/13 Page 1 of 10
Case 213-cv-01070-DB Document 2 Filed 12/03/13 Page 1 of 10 J. Preston Stieff (4764) J. Preston Stieff Law Offices 136 East South Temple, Suite 2400 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Telephone (801) 366-6002
More informationCase 3:13-mc RAL Document 11 Filed 10/15/13 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 43 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA CENTRAL DIVISION
Case 3:13-mc-00005-RAL Document 11 Filed 10/15/13 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 43 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FILED OCT 1 5 2013 DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA ~~ CENTRAL DIVISION MICHELLE BRENNER, individually CIV
More informationCase 3:09-cv WKW-TFM Document 12 Filed 05/04/2009 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT
Case 3:09-cv-00305-WKW-TFM Document 12 Filed 05/04/2009 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT T.P. JOHNSON HOLDINGS, LLC. JACK M. JOHNSON AND TERI S. JOHNSON, AS SHAREHOLDERS/MEMBERS,
More informationCase3:11-cv JW Document14 Filed08/29/11 Page1 of 8
Case:-cv-00-JW Document Filed0// Page of 0 Robert A. Rosette (CA SBN ) Richard J. Armstrong (CA SBN ) Nicole St. Germain (CA SBN ) ROSETTE, LLP Attorneys at Law Blue Ravine Rd., Suite Folsom, CA 0 () -0
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 4:11-cv-00782-JHP -PJC Document 22 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 03/15/12 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA EDDIE SANTANA ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 11-CV-782-JHP-PJC
More informationUnited States ex rel. Steele v. Turn Key Gaming, Inc.
Caution As of: November 11, 2013 9:47 AM EST United States ex rel. Steele v. Turn Key Gaming, Inc. United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit December 12, 1997, Submitted ; February 9, 1998,
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: U. S. (1998) 1 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions,
More informationCase 1:15-cv JAP-CG Document 39 Filed 09/18/15 Page 1 of 25 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
Case 1:15-cv-00501-JAP-CG Document 39 Filed 09/18/15 Page 1 of 25 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW MEXICO, a New Mexico corporation, Plaintiff,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 4:11-cv-00675-CVE-TLW Document 16 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 03/12/12 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA EASTERN SHAWNEE TRIBE OF ) OKLAHOMA, ) ) Plaintiff,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN PLAINTIFF S RESPONSE TO THE DEFENDANTS JOINT MOTION TO DISMISS
Case 1:17-cv-01083-JTN-ESC ECF No. 31 filed 05/04/18 PageID.364 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN JOY SPURR Plaintiff, v. Case No. 1:17-cv-01083 Hon. Janet
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION
Case 3:10-cv-01936-M Document 24 Filed 07/20/11 Page 1 of 11 PageID 177 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION AMERICAN HOME MORTGAGE SERVICING, INC., v. Plaintiff,
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: U. S. (1998) 1 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 96 1037 KIOWA TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA, PETITIONER v. MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGIES, INC. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF OKLAHOMA,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA (1) KAREN HARRIS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. 11-CV-654-GKF-FHM ) (2) MUSCOGEE (CREEK) NATION d/b/a ) RIVER SPIRIT CASINO,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Applicant, v. Case No. 13-MC-61 FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY, d/b/a Potawatomi Bingo Casino, Respondent.
More informationCase 2:05-cr LHT-DLH Document 33 Filed 11/01/2007 Page 1 of 6
Case 2:05-cr-00005-LHT-DLH Document 33 Filed 11/01/2007 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA BRYSON CITY DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) Plaintiff,
More informationNatural Resources Journal
Natural Resources Journal 23 Nat Resources J. 1 (Winter 1983) Winter 1983 Regulatory Jurisdiction over Indian Country Retail Liquor Sales Thomas E. Lilley Recommended Citation Thomas E. Lilley, Regulatory
More informationSupreme Court of the Unitel~ Statee
Supreme Court of the Unitel~ Statee DARREL GUSTAFSON, Petitioner, ESTATE OF LEON POITRA AND LINUS POITRA, Respondents. On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The North Dakota Supreme Court PETITION FOR
More informationThis opinion is subject to revision before publication in the Pacific Reporter. IN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS. ----ooooo----
This opinion is subject to revision before publication in the Pacific Reporter. IN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS ----ooooo---- State of Utah, v. Plaintiff and Appellee, Rickie L. Reber, Steven Paul Thunehorst,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTERICT OF MONTANA GREAT FALLS DIVISION
Case 4:14-cv-00050-BMM Document 31 Filed 10/24/14 Page 1 of 17 Joe J. McKay Attorney-at-Law P.O. Box 1803 Browning, MT 59417 Phone/Fax: (406) 338-7262 Email: powerbuffalo@yahoo.com Dax F. Garza Dax F.
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
CHRISTINE WARREN, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit October 18, 2016 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court Plaintiff - Appellant, v.
More informationNo IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT UTE INDIAN TRIBE, MYTON,
Appellate Case: 15-4080 Document: 01019509860 01019511871 Date Filed: 10/19/2015 10/22/2015 Page: 1 No. 15-4080 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT UTE INDIAN TRIBE, v. Plaintiff-Appellant
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case 5:15-cv-01262-M Document 14 Filed 01/08/16 Page 1 of 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA MARCIA W. DAVILLA, et al. Plaintiffs and Counterclaim Defendants, v. ENABLE
More informationSupreme Court of the United States
No. 12-376 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States JOHN V. FURRY, as Personal Representative Of the Estate and Survivors of Tatiana H. Furry, v. Petitioner, MICCOSUKEE TRIBE OF INDIANS OF FLORIDA; MICCOSUKEE
More informationNo UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
Appellate Case: 17-6188 Document: 01019976278 Date Filed: 04/16/2018 Page: 1 No. 17-6188 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ENABLE OKLAHOMA INTRASTATE TRANSMISSION, LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant,
More informationCase at a Glance. Can the Secretary of the Interior Take Land Into Trust for a Rhode Island Indian Tribe Recognized in 1983?
Case at a Glance The Indian Reorganization Act authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to acquire lands for Indians, and defines that term to include all persons of Indian descent who are members of any
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 4:07-cv-00642-CVE-PJC Document 46 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 01/04/2008 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA WAGONER COUNTY RURAL WATER DISTRICT NO. 2, an agency of the
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before TYMKOVICH, Chief Judge, HOLMES and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges.
TWILLADEAN CINK, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit November 27, 2015 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court Plaintiff - Appellant, v.
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 4:11-cv-00675-CVE-TLW Document 26 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 08/22/12 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA EASTERN SHAWNEE TRIBE OF ) OKLAHOMA, ) ) Plaintiff,
More informationSupreme Court of the United States
No. 17-387 ================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States --------------------------------- --------------------------------- UPPER SKAGIT INDIAN
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO Opinion Number: Filing Date: July 23, 2013 Docket No. 31,297 HAMAATSA, INC., a New Mexico not-for-profit corporation, v. Plaintiff-Appellee, PUEBLO OF
More informationNo. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. BOB BURRELL and SUSAN BURRELL,
No. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES BOB BURRELL and SUSAN BURRELL, v. Petitioners, LEONARD ARMIJO, Governor of Santa Ana Pueblo and Acting Chief of Santa Ana Tribal Police; LAWRENCE MONTOYA,
More informationCase 3:16-cv EMC Document 382 Filed 07/24/18 Page 1 of 7
Case :-cv-0-emc Document Filed 0// Page of Theodore A. Griffinger, Jr. (SBN 0) Ellen A. Cirangle (SBN ) LUBIN OLSON & NIEWIADOMSKI LLP The Transamerica Pyramid 00 Montgomery Street, th Floor San Francisco,
More informationInsuring Title to Indian Lands. David A. Green, Underwriting Counsel Stewart Title Guaranty Company
Insuring Title to Indian Lands David A. Green, Underwriting Counsel Stewart Title Guaranty Company Introduction Title Insurance of Indian Lands is considered a Special Risk CALL YOUR UNDERWRITER Different
More informationCase 6:11-cv CJS Document 76 Filed 12/11/18 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. Defendant.
Case 6:11-cv-06004-CJS Document 76 Filed 12/11/18 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK CAYUGA INDIAN NATION OF NEW YORK, -v- SENECA COUNTY, NEW YORK, Plaintiff, Defendant.
More informationUNITED STATES et al. v. McINTIRE et al. FLATHEAD IRR. DIST. v. SAME.
101 F.2d 650 (1939) UNITED STATES et al. v. McINTIRE et al. FLATHEAD IRR. DIST. v. SAME. Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. No. 8797. January 31, 1939. *651 John B. Tansil, U. S. Atty., of Butte,
More informationState Habeas and Tribal Habeas: Identical or Fraternal Twins? By Barbara Creel and Veronica C. Gonzales-Zamora August 31, 2017
State Habeas and Tribal Habeas: Identical or Fraternal Twins? By Barbara Creel and Veronica C. Gonzales-Zamora August 31, 2017 In law school, you learn about the great writ, also known as the writ of habeas
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: U. S. (1999) 1 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 97 1337 MINNESOTA, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. MILLE LACS BAND OF CHIPPEWA INDIANS ET AL. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
More informationCase 5:09-cv RDR-KGS Document 19 Filed 11/05/09 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
Case 5:09-cv-04107-RDR-KGS Document 19 Filed 11/05/09 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS ROBERT NANOMANTUBE, vs. Plaintiff, Case No. 09-4107-RDR THE KICKAPOO TRIBE
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION
Case 1:14-cv-00066-CG-B Document 31 Filed 04/25/14 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION STATE OF ALABAMA, ex rel ) ASHLEY RICH, District Attorney
More informationCase 2:16-cv CW Document 85 Filed 02/17/18 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
Case 2:16-cv-00579-CW Document 85 Filed 02/17/18 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION UTE INDIAN TRIBE OF THE UINTAH AND OURAY RESERVATION, et al.,
More informationIn the Supreme Court of the United States
No. In the Supreme Court of the United States STATE OF MICHIGAN, PETITIONER v. BAY MILLS INDIAN COMMUNITY ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
More informationCase 3:16-cr MAM Document 35 Filed 01/28/17 Page 1 of 13 PageID #: 69 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA CENTRAL DIVISION
Case 3:16-cr-30164-MAM Document 35 Filed 01/28/17 Page 1 of 13 PageID #: 69 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA CENTRAL DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, vs. MARWAN SADEKNI,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
Appellate Case: 16-2050 Document: 01019698797 Date Filed: 09/30/2016 Page: 1 No. 16-2050 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW MEXICO, Plaintiff-Appellant,
More information(Reprinted with amendments adopted on May 17, 2017) SECOND REPRINT S.B. 33. Referred to Committee on Judiciary
(Reprinted with amendments adopted on May, ) SECOND REPRINT S.B. SENATE BILL NO. COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY (ON BEHALF OF THE OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR) PREFILED NOVEMBER, Referred to Committee on Judiciary SUMMARY
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case 5:11-cv-01078-D Document 16 Filed 11/04/11 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA APACHE TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA, vs. Plaintiff, TGS ANADARKO LLC; and WELLS
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION 1:17CV240
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION 1:17CV240 JOSEPH CLARK, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) MEMORANDUM AND ) RECOMMENDATION HARRAH S NC CASINO COMPANY,
More informationPreserving The Chain Of Title
Portfolio Media, Inc. 648 Broadway, Suite 200 New York, NY 10012 www.law360.com Phone: +1 212 537 6331 Fax: +1 212 537 6371 customerservice@portfoliomedia.com Preserving The Chain Of Title Law360, New
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case :-cv-000-wqh -BGS Document 0 Filed 0// Page of 0 0 GLORIA MORRISON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Plaintiff, vs. VIEJAS ENTERPRISES, an entity; VIEJAS BAND OF KUMEYAAY
More informationCase 1:15-cv JAP-CG Document 114 Filed 01/22/16 Page 1 of 19
Case 1:15-cv-00501-JAP-CG Document 114 Filed 01/22/16 Page 1 of 19 PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW MEXICO, a New Mexico corporation, Plaintiff, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW
More informationDEPUTIZATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE HOOPA VALLEY TRIBE AND THE COUNTY OF HUMBOLDT
DEPUTIZATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE HOOPA VALLEY TRIBE AND THE COUNTY OF HUMBOLDT The Hoopa Valley Tribe (hereinafter referred to as Tribe ), a sovereign, federallyrecognized Indian Tribe, and the County
More informationCOOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR MUTUAL ASSISTANCE IN LAW ENFORCEMENT
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR MUTUAL ASSISTANCE IN LAW ENFORCEMENT This Agreement is made and entered into by and between those Utah public agencies listed hereafter as signatories to this Agreement, the United
More informationAMENDING THE OKLAHOMA MODEL TRIBAL GAMING COMPACT. by Graydon Dean Luthey, Jr. of the Oklahoma Bar*
AMENDING THE OKLAHOMA MODEL TRIBAL GAMING COMPACT by Graydon Dean Luthey, Jr. of the Oklahoma Bar* The recent settlement agreement between the Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribes and the Governor of Oklahoma (Exhibit
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA COMANCHE NATION, OKLAHOMA, Plaintiff -vs- Case No. CIV-05-328-F UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND
More informationNo Respondents. Moses, Kampfe, Tollivcr and Wright, Billings, Montana Frank Kampfe argued, Billings, Montana
No. 13332 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 1976 STATE OF MONTANA ex re1 SHARON OLD ELK, JR., Relator, THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA, in and for the County of Big Horn, and the
More informationCase 4:15-cv CVE-PJC Document 32 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 07/31/15 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 4:15-cv-00386-CVE-PJC Document 32 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 07/31/15 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA STATE OF OKLAHOMA ex rel. E. Scott Pruitt, in his official
More informationCase 5:15-cv M Document 56 Filed 03/28/17 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 5:15-cv-01262-M Document 56 Filed 03/28/17 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA MARCIA W. DAVILLA, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) Case No. CIV-15-1262-M
More informationCase 1:15-cv JAP-KK Document 48 Filed 08/11/15 Page 1 of 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
Case 1:15-cv-00056-JAP-KK Document 48 Filed 08/11/15 Page 1 of 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 1:15-cv-00056-JAP-KK
More informationSTATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit November 9, 2010 PUBLISH Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT BELVA ANN NAHNO-LOPEZ; BERDENE NAHNO-LOPEZ;
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT No. 11-2217 County of Charles Mix, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the v. * District of South Dakota. * United
More informationSupreme Court of the United States
No. 13-852 ================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States --------------------------------- --------------------------------- FEDERAL NATIONAL
More informationPublic Law as Amended by the Tribal Law and Order Act July 29, 2010
Public Law 83-280 as Amended by the Tribal Law and Order Act July 29, 2010 The Tribal Law and Order Act of 2010 makes several amendments to Public Law 83-280 to enhance federal criminal authority within
More informationThe Indian Reorganization (W'heeler-Howard Act) June 18, 1934
The Indian Reorganization (W'heeler-Howard Act) June 18, 1934 Act --An Act to conserve and develop Indian lands and resources; to extend to Indians the right to form business and other organizations; to
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION ONE
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION ONE No. 66969-9-I/2 CHRIS YOUNG as an individual person and as the personal No. 66969-9-I representative of the ESTATE OF JEFFRY YOUNG, ORDER
More informationNo IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES LUMMI NATION, ET AL., PETITIONERS SAMISH INDIAN TRIBE, ET AL.
No. 05-445 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES LUMMI NATION, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. SAMISH INDIAN TRIBE, ET AL. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE
More informationNo Supreme Court of the United States. Argued Dec. 1, Decided Feb. 24, /11 JUSTICE MARSHALL delivered the opinion of the Court.
FOR EDUCATIONAL USE ONLY Copr. West 2000 No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works 480 U.S. 9 IOWA MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner v. Edward M. LaPLANTE et al. No. 85-1589. Supreme Court of the United States
More informationNorthern Cheyenne Tribe v. Adsit
Public Land and Resources Law Review Volume 4 Northern Cheyenne Tribe v. Adsit James L. Vogel Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.umt.edu/plrlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case 2:15-cv-02463-RGK-MAN Document 31 Filed 07/02/15 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #:335 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JS-6 CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Case No. CV 15-02463-RGK (MANx)
More informationCIVIL JURISDICTION IN INDIAN COUNTRY
CIVIL JURISDICTION IN INDIAN COUNTRY Radisson Fort McDowell December 8-9, 2011 Tribal Judicial Institute UND School of Law The Tribal Judicial Institute established in 1993 with an award from a private
More informationKristina M. Reader. Volume 12 Issue 2 Article 4
Volume 12 Issue 2 Article 4 2001 Empowering Tribes - The District of Columbia Circuit Upholds Tribal Authority to Regulate Air Quality throughout Reservation Lands in Arizona Public Service Company v.
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 5:15-cv-01250-M Document 47 Filed 03/07/16 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA ENABLE OKLAHOMA INTRASTATE ) TRANSMISSION, LLC ) Plaintiff, ) ) v.
More informationCHASE MANHATTAN BANK V. CANDELARIA, 2004-NMCA-112, 136 N.M
CHASE MANHATTAN BANK V. CANDELARIA, 2004-NMCA-112, 136 N.M. 332, 98 P.3d 722 THE CHASE MANHATTAN BANK, AS TRUSTEE OF IMC HOME EQUITY LOAN TRUST 1998-4 UNDER THE POOLING AND SERVICING AGREEMENT DATED AS
More informationCASE NO. 1D Daniel W. Hartman of Hartman Law Firm, P.A.; Eric S. Haug of Eric S. Haug Law & Consulting, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellants.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA SANDRA A. FORERO and WILLIAM L. FORERO, v. Appellants, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF
More informationSUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA
REL:06/05/2015 Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Alabama Appellate
More informationNo IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT. PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW MEXICO, Plaintiff-Appellant,
Appellate Case: 16-2050 Document: 01019699002 Date Filed: 09/30/2016 Page: 1 No. 16-2050 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW MEXICO, Plaintiff-Appellant,
More informationCase 1:13-cv S-LDA Document 16 Filed 08/29/13 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 178 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
Case 1:13-cv-00185-S-LDA Document 16 Filed 08/29/13 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 178 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND ) DOUGLAS J. LUCKERMAN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 13-185
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
Case :-cv-0-lrs Document Filed // 0 Rob Costello Deputy Attorney General Mary Tennyson William G. Clark Assistant Attorneys General Attorney General of Washington PO Box 00 Olympia, WA 0-00 Telephone:
More informationCOUNSEL JUDGES OPINION
1 ROMERO V. STATE, 1982-NMSC-028, 97 N.M. 569, 642 P.2d 172 (S. Ct. 1982) ELIU E. ROMERO, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO, ALEX J. ARMIJO, Commissioner of Public Lands, Defendants-Appellants.
More informationIn the Supreme Court of the United States
No. 17-532 In the Supreme Court of the United States CLAYVIN HERRERA, PETITIONER v. STATE OF WYOMING ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF WYOMING, SHERIDAN COUNTY BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Case: 17-20324 Document: 00514574430 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/27/2018 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Summary Calendar MARK ANTHONY FORNESA; RICARDO FORNESA, JR., v. Plaintiffs
More informationv. NO. 29,799 APPEAL FROM THE WORKERS COMPENSATION ADMINISTRATION Gregory D. Griego, Workers Compensation Judge
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Reports. Please see Rule 1-0 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. Please
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before HENRY, Chief Judge, TYMKOVICH and HOLMES, Circuit Judges.
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit June 23, 2008 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ELMORE SHERIFF, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ACCELERATED
More information22 nd Annual Tribal Law & Governance Conference Friday, March 9, 2018 University of Kansas School of Law
22 nd Annual Tribal Law & Governance Conference Friday, March 9, 2018 University of Kansas School of Law Tribal/State Collaboration: Law Enforcement Professor Sarah Deer Key definition: Cross deputization
More informationCase: Document: 64 Page: 1 04/03/ IN THE. United States Court of Appeals FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
Case: 12-3723 Document: 64 Page: 1 04/03/2013 896401 49 12-3723-cv IN THE United States Court of Appeals FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT CAYUGA INDIAN NATION OF NEW YORK, v. Plaintiff-Appellee, SENECA COUNTY, NEW
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 5:08-cv-00429-D Document 85 Filed 04/16/2010 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA TINA MARIE SOMERLOTT ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) ) Case No. CIV-08-429-D
More information