Otoe-Missouria Tribe of Indians Seeks to Quash Third-Party Subpoena in Class Action re: Sovereign Lending

Here is the motion in Dillon v. BMO Harris (W.D. Okla.):

1 Motion to Quash

Here are materials in the North Carolina portion of this suit.

Tohono O’odham Nation against Arizona Dept. of Gaming Director to Proceed

Here are the materials in Tohono O’odham Nation v. Ducey (D. Ariz.):

3 TON Motion for PI

49 Governor-AG Motion to Dismiss

50 Ariz Dept of Gaming Motion to Dismiss

60 TON Response to 50

69 ADG Reply

70 Gov-AG Reply

80 TON Reply in Support of PI

Derek Kauanoe on Native Hawaiian Rights

Here is “Law Recognizes Native Hawaiians as Indigenous People With Special Rights: Legal rulings dating back to 1863 and ongoing global recognition today confirm the appropriateness of laws that apply only to indigenous Native Hawaiians.”

Update in Agua Caliente Band v. Coachella Valley Water District

Briefs filed by the Tribe and the United States to obtain summary judgment on the water districts’ equitable defenses asserted in response to the Tribe’s claim for a declaration of its federally reserved rights to groundwater.

Here:

2015-09-18 – Dkt 137 – US Notice and Motion for Partial Summary Judgment…

2015-09-18 – Dkt 138 – ACBCI Notice and Motion for Partial Summary Judgm…

Prior materials here.

Trust Breach Claims by Nine Tribes Survives Motion to Dismiss

Here are the materials in Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate v. Jewell (D.C. District Court):

17 Amended Complaint

19 US Motion to Dismiss

22 Opposition

23 US Reply

27 DCT Order

Prophetstown

   
    
    
    
   

Potawatomi Trail of Death: Day Two and Three Trail Markers

   
   

Potawatomi Trail of Death: Menominee’s Village

   
    
   

D.C. Circuit Decides Expenses Appeal in Cobell v. Jewell 

Here is the opinion.

An excerpt:

This is the eleventh appeal to this court in nearly two decades of litigation arising out of the Department of the Interior’s misadministration of Native American trust accounts and an ensuing complex, nationwide litigation and settlement. As the case winds down, the class action representatives have appealed the district court’s denial of compensation for expenses incurred during the litigation and settlement process.
We affirm the district court’s denial of additional compensation for expenses for the lead plaintiff, Elouise Cobell, because the district court expressly wrapped those costs into an incentive award given to her earlier. We conclude, however, that the district court erred in categorically rejecting as procedurally barred the class representatives’ claim for the recovery of third-party payments, and remand for the district court to apply its accumulated expertise and discretion to the question of whether third-party compensation can and should be paid under the Settlement Agreement.

Briefs here.

Lower court materials here.

Agua Caliente Band Seeks In House Counsel CLOSED

CLOSED