Obituary here.
Arthur Lazarus Jr. Has Died
Obituary here.
Obituary here.
Here is the opinion in Brakebill v. Jaeger.
Materials and other coverage here.
Here are the new materials in Bell v. City of Lacey (W.D. Wash.):
53-bell-response-to-tribe-mtd.pdf
Prior pleadings, including the tribe’s motion on the pleadings (docket no. 36), are here.
Here:
Questions presented:
“[T]he inherent sovereign powers of an Indian tribe do not extend to the activities of nonmembers of the tribe.” Montana v. United States, 450 U.S. 544, 565 (1981). The Montana Court recognized two limited narrow exceptions to that rule. But the Court has never resolved the question of whether tribal courts may ever exercise civil tort jurisdiction over nonmembers. In Plains Commerce Bank v. Long Family Land & Cattle Co., 554 U.S. 316 (2008) and in Dollar General Corporation and Dolgencorp, LLC v. The Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, et. al. 136 S.Ct. 2159 (2016) the issue was brought before this Court, but unanswered. This case presents the issue of: Whether Indian tribal courts have jurisdiction to adjudicate civil tort claims against nonmembers?
Further this case presents the issue of: If the Indian tribal courts have jurisdiction to adjudicate civil tort claims over nonmembers, what is the prerequisite notice of any such authority, what is the prerequisite consent thereto by a nonmember, and what is the viable scope of such jurisdiction so as to satisfy the Due Process rights of a nonmember?
Lower court materials here.
UPDATE:
Here.
Here is the opinion in Sandmann v. WP Company LLC (N.D. Ky.):
H/T Above the Law.
Worth a read, from the Portland Observer, here.
Introduced by Rep. Haaland.
Here are the materials in Landreth v. United States (Fed. Cl.):
13-chenault-motion-to-file-amicus-brief.pdf
14-dct-order-denying-chenault-amicus.pdf
18-quinault-motion-to-file-amicus-brief.pdf
20-us-consent-to-quinault-motion.pdf
21-response-to-us-motion-to-dismiss.pdf
34-dct-order-denying-quinault-motion.pdf
You must be logged in to post a comment.