Here is “Law is the least diverse profession in the nation. And lawyers aren’t doing enough to change that.”
Author: Matthew L.M. Fletcher
Poarch Band Creek Sues Alabama Official over Taxes on Trust Property
Here is the complaint in Poarch Band of Creek Indians v. Hildreth (S.D. Ala.):
Webinar Announcement: “Modernizing and Reforming the United States’s Nation-to-Nation Trust Relations and Indian Trust Asset Management”
Adoption Industry Sues to Challenge New ICWA Guidelines
Here is the complaint in National Council for Adoption v. Jewell (E.D. Va.):
Oops. Kate posted this forever ago.
California Appeals Court Holds Pechanga Casino Officials May Be Sued in Employment Action
Here is the opinion in Cosentino v. Fuller:
An excerpt:
For sovereign immunity to apply, the claims against tribal officials must be based on actions the officials took in their official capacity and within the scope of their official authority. An official’s actions that exceed the scope of his or her authority are not protected. Although the parties do not dispute that as members of the tribe’s gaming commission Defendants had the authority to revoke a gaming license if they received reliable information the licensee no longer satisfied the requirements for obtaining a license or had engaged in conduct that reflected poorly upon the tribe or its gaming activities, the record lacks evidence showing Defendants received any such information about Cosentino or an explanation of why they revoked his gaming license. Cosentino, however, presented evidence supporting his claim Defendants exceeded the scope of their authority by revoking his license without cause and in retaliation against him. Sovereign immunity prevents us from inquiring into the reliability of information Defendants may have relied upon in revoking Cosentino’s license or any other errors they may have made, but it does not prevent inquiry into whether Defendants exceeded their authority by using their official position to intentionally harm Cosentino.
Materials in a related Ninth Circuit matter are here.
Wisconsin SCT Rules in Favor of Tribe in Zoning Dispute
Here are the materials in Oneida Seven Generations Corp. v. City of Green Bay:
Oneida Seven Gen v Green Bay WI SCt Opinion
An excerpt:
Like the court of appeals we conclude that the City’s decision to rescind the conditional use permit was not based on substantial evidence. In conducting a certiorari review to determine whether there was substantial evidence to support a decision, we consider the evidence in context. Considering the context, we determine that based on the evidence presented, the City could not reasonably conclude that the statements by Oneida Seven’s representative to the City government regarding the proposed facility’s emissions and hazardous materials, its stacks, and its technology were misrepresentations. Accordingly, we affirm the court of appeals.
NYTs’Op/Ed: “Selling Off Apache Holy Land”
Here.
NIGC Attorney Posting
Here.
NPR on Climate Change at Navajo
Eighth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of FTCA Claim involving Rosebud Sioux Tribal Police
Here is the opinion in Sorace v. United States.
An excerpt:
Norma Sorace (“Sorace”), Administratix of the Estates of Melanie Sorace and Jahneva Cannaday, a minor, filed suit against the United States of America alleging a claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”) based upon a drunk-driving accident on the Rosebud Sioux Indian Reservation in South Dakota. Melanie Sorace and Jahneva Cannaday were killed when an intoxicated Shad Dillon (“Dillon”) crashed his pickup into a vehicle driven by Melanie Sorace. Sorace alleges that the Rosebud Sioux Tribe’s Police Department (“RST PD”) was negligent in failing to locate and arrest Dillon prior to the accident. The United States of America (“United States”) filed a motion to dismiss, which the district court1 granted. Sorace appeals, and we affirm.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.