Author: Matthew L.M. Fletcher
TICA/ILPC Conference Pics
NYTs: “Time to Move the Standing Rock Pipeline”
Here.
Tribal Lender Immune from Telephone Consumer Protection Act Suit
Here are the materials in Finn v. Great Plains Lending LLC (W.D. Okla.):
Arizona COA Allows On-Reservation Utility to Challenge State Taxes
Here is the opinion in South Point Energy Center LLC v. Arizona Dept. of Revenue.
An excerpt:
South Point Energy Center, LLC (“South Point”) appeals the tax court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of the Arizona Department of Revenue and Mohave County (collectively, “Defendants”) on South Point’s actions challenging the assessment of property taxes. The tax court concluded that South Point was collaterally estopped from challenging the legality of the taxes and that relief was not available under the error-correction statutes. We disagree. First, issue preclusion did not apply because South Point’s challenges were based on an issue not raised in previous litigation. Second, the alleged error falls within the broad category of mistakes for which relief is available under the errorcorrection statutes.
TICA/ILPC High Muckamucks (with Kevin Washburn)

High muckamuck, for example, comes from Chinook Jargon hayo makamak, “plenty to eat.” 🙂
ILPC/TICA Conference Intro and Keynote
Corrected Navajo Nation RFP for Treasury Offset Work
Here:
2016-11-02 Reissue RFP Treasury Offsets Final
The description:
RFP REISSUE CLARIFYING NOVEMBER 9 RESPONSE DEADLINE: The Navajo Nation seeks assistance in litigation, administrative outreach, and lobbying to assist in matters related to federal administrative offsets made by the U.S. Department of the Treasury for disputed debts. Selected Respondent will provide legal services to secure a favorable outcome of the disputes and will litigate those disputes if necessary. The Navajo Nation Department of Justice will be accepting proposals for this service postmarked by 5:00 PM MT on Wednesday, November 9, 2016. NO LATE PROPOSALS WILL BE ACCEPTED.
Ninth Circuit Remands Two Appeals Affected by U.S. v. Bryant
Here are the materials in United States v. Stewart.
Here are the materials in United States v. Kirkaldie.
Turtle Talk Poll Results — Nooksack Disenrollments
Few Turtle Talk readers support disenrolling the so-called Nooksack 306. The vast majority of TT readers think Nooksack should hold elections before disenrollments. There is a wide variety of opinions on which forum should resolve the disputes.
Question: Should the Nooksack 306 Be Disenrolled?
| COUNT | PERCENT | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Yes |
12 | 4.44% | ||
|
No |
202 | 74.81% | ||
|
Don’t Know |
56 | 20.74% | ||
Question: Should the Nooksack Tribe Hold Elections Before Proceeding with Disenrollments?
| COUNT | PERCENT | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Yes |
212 | 85.48% | ||
|
No |
25 | 10.08% | ||
|
Don’t Know |
11 | 4.44% | ||
Question: Which forum is the best place to resolve litigation arising from this dispute?
| COUNT | PERCENT | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Nooksack tribal council (incl. Nooksack Supreme Court) |
14 | 5.45% | ||
|
Nooksack tribal judiciary |
89 | 34.63% | ||
|
Bureau of Indian Affairs |
51 | 19.84% | ||
|
Federal or state courts |
80 | 31.13% | ||
|
International forums |
7 | 2.72% | ||
|
Other |
16 | 6.23% | ||
















You must be logged in to post a comment.