Author: Matthew L.M. Fletcher – Page 367

Once associated with a legendary Native American leader, “Crazy Horse” is now a registered trademark for “entertainment services, namely, exotic dance performances.” We must decide whether Russell Road’s use of the mark “Crazy Horse III” for its Las Vegas strip club infringes defendants Frank Spencer and Crazy Horse Consulting’s rights to the trademark “Crazy Horse.” The district court granted summary judgment to Russell Road, holding that it has the right to use the mark because it is the assignee of a valid trademark co-existence agreement entered into with the former owner of the registered Crazy Horse mark. We agree, and therefore affirm the entry of summary judgment in favor of Russell Road.

Federal Court Rejects Challenge to Major Crimes Act Conviction, Defendant Argued Justice Thomas’ View of Indian Law

July 25, 2016July 25, 2016Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in United States v. Bearcomesout (D. Mont.):

An excerpt:

Citing decades of “schizophrenic” case law, Bearcomesout argues that the law has evolved such that the Northern Cheyenne Tribe’s concept of self-governance and sovereignty has disappeared. As a result, Bearcomesout argues that the Tribe is “subject to the external whim of the United States” which inherently extinguishes the tribe’s sovereignty. Because the Tribe is not sovereign, Bearcomesout argues that her prosecution in Northern Cheyenne Tribal Court was in essence a federal prosecution, in violation of the Double Jeopardy Clause.

The obvious disagreement about the state of tribal sovereignty among Supreme Court justices contained in various dissents and concurrences over the years unquestionably creates uncertainty and doubt about whether the term “independent sovereign” still appropriately applies to Indian tribes. Nevertheless, as recently as June of this year, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the rule from Wheeler and its progeny that tribal sovereignty continues to exist, at least as it relates to Double Jeopardy….

Lawyer Volunteers Needed for NM Domestic Violence Advocacy Project

July 25, 2016Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here (pages 6-7):

LA VOZ for July 2016

Laguna Loses Contract Dispute with Defense Dept.

July 21, 2016Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion in Laguna Construction Co. v. Carter.

D.C. Circuit Forces Mackinac Tribe to Exhaust Remedies in Its Quest for Federal Recognition

July 20, 2016Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the per curiam opinion in Mackinac Tribe v. Jewell.

Judge Brown filed a concurrence criticizing Interior for its delays.

Briefs here.

Gun Lake Tribe Prevails in Patchak Matter

July 18, 2016Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion in Patchak v. Jewell.

Here are the briefs.

Eleventh Circuit Affirms Injunction Favoring Poarch Band against Escambia County Assessor

July 12, 2016Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the opinion in Poarch Band of Creek Indians v. Hildreth.

An excerpt:

The Poarch Band of Creek Indians (“Poarch Band”) sued James Hildreth,
Tax Assessor of Escambia County, Alabama, for declaratory and injunctive relief to prevent the assessment of property taxes on lands owned by the Poarch Band in Escambia County, Alabama, and held in trust by the United States (“Trust Property”). The Poarch Band maintains the Trust Property is exempt from taxation pursuant to the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 (“IRA”). See 25 U.S.C. § 465.1 The district court granted injunctive relief barring the tax assessment efforts during the pendency of the case, and Hildreth appeals.2 Finding no abuse of discretion and no error of law, we affirm.

Briefs here.