Eighth Circuit Affirms General Crimes Act Conviction

Here is the unpublished opinion in United States v. Bear Runner.

Mass. Appeals Court Affirms Gay Head Aquinnah Retain Easements on Martha’s Vineyard

For all you property profs out there….

Here is the opinion in Kitras v. Town of Aquinnah.

An excerpt:

From the earliest time, the members of the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (now known as Aquinnah) in Martha’s Vineyard (Gay Head Tribe or Tribe), had a custom and practice of common access across the lands that are the subject of this appeal. For the reasons that follow, we conclude that the ancient origins of that common access—dating back before the late eighteenth century—establish the equivalent of a chain of title, with access rights that would not yield landlocked parcels. The late nineteenth century State statutory conveyance of large tracts of public common land in Aquinnah, including the subject lands, by the Legislature as grantor to the newly enfranchised Gay Head Tribe members as grantees, and the subsequent judicial partitioning of these governmentally conveyed lands did not, we determine, break these preexisting access rights. More specifically, the subsequent grantees of land tracts in the links of this chain of conveyances from the Gay Head Tribe members to the present plaintiffs were not divested of these long-held access rights flowing from the longstanding tribal custom and practice so as to leave the plaintiffs’ lots landlocked and bereft of easements.

It is so that a plumb line—with perfectly fit easements in the precise transverse of paths walked by and through the lands by the Gay Head Tribe members, in their custom and practice—would, in this present time, be most difficult to reconstruct by metes and bounds since property boundaries were not set in that manner in the statutory governmental conveyances and subsequent judicial partition that deeded the lots to the Gay Head Tribe members in severalty. But such precision, following the paths of the Gay Head Tribe’s custom and practice, is not required under the legal doctrine of easements by necessity which underlies the Restatement (Third) of Property (Servitudes) (Restatement) § 2.15 (2000) and Massachusetts common law. We remand to the Land Court to draw the necessary easement lines in accord with these legal doctrines—a practice well within the great skills of that court.

Utah Law School VAP Announcement

The University of Utah – S.J. Quinney College of Law invites applications for the position of visiting assistant professor, for a two-year term beginning in academic year 2015-2016. Qualifications for the position include a record of excellence in academics, successful teaching experience or potential as a teacher, and strong scholarly distinction or promise.  Interested persons should submit an application to the Chair of Appointments, Andy Hessick, at andy.hessick@law.utah.edu.

The University of Utah is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action employer and educator.  Minorities, women, and persons with disabilities are strongly encouraged to apply.  The University also affords a preference to qualified veterans upon request.  Reasonable accommodations provided.  For additional information: http://www.regulations.utah.edu/humanResources/5-106.html.

The University of Utah values candidates who have experience working in settings with students from diverse backgrounds and possess a strong commitment to improving access to higher education for historically underrepresented students.

Stanford’s Second Annual Native American Law Conference – February 7th

Conference page here.

Breakfast                                                     9:30am-10:30am

Panel #1                                                     10:30am-12:00pm

(Constructing Judicial Systems)

Lunch & Cultural Event                              12:00pm-2:00pm

Panel #2                                                     2:15pm-3:45pm

(Environmental Human Rights in Indian Country)

Panel #3                                                     4:00pm-5:30pm

(Intellectual Property Law and Native Representation)

Reception                                                    5:30pm-7:00pm

 

Confirmed panelists include Cheryl Demmert Fairbanks (Cuddy & McCarthy); Stephanie Fryberg (University of Washington); Cynthia Gomez (State of California); Darcie Houck (Partner, Fredericks Peebles & Morgan); Adrienne Keene (Native Appropriations); Jessica Koski (Keweenaw Bay Indian Community); Gail Small (Native Action); Gerald Torres (Cornell Law); and Paula Yost (Dentons).

Federal Court Remands Choctaw Contract Dispute with its Insurer in Removal Action

Here are the materials in Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma v. Occidental Fire & Insurance Co. (E.D. Okla.):

15 Occidental Motion to Dismiss

17 Choctaw Motion to Remand

18 Choctaw Opposition to Motion to Dismiss

22 Occidental Reply

26 Occidental Opposition to Motion to Remand

28 Choctaw Reply

31 DCT Order

An excerpt:

Occidental characterizes the issue in this case as whether it may assert or waive the Nation’s sovereign immunity in connection with insurance coverage on a claim made on the policy. It has not been suggested that Congress provided authority for an insurer such as Occidental to abrogate, waive, or otherwise assert the sovereign immunity of an Indian nation through appropriate legislation. Consequently, the source of the waiver must be the Nation itself. The sole unequivocal statement of the relationship between the Nation and the insurers is the policy itself. Indeed, Occidental recognizes this fact by relying upon certain provisions within the policy to argue the Nation has specifically granted it a waiver or control over the assertion of sovereign immunity. The interpretation of the terms of the policy as a contract is governed exclusively by state law.

Who Won American Indian Law and Policy in 2014? Championship Round

The final is here.

#2 Tribal Sovereign Immunity v. #10 Tribal In-House Counsel Association

Immunity won with a narrow 54-46 percent margin over Alaska Native tribes. The big splash of the Supreme Court victory overwhelms the big news year for Alaska Native tribes.

The Tribal In-House Counsel Association wins easily over Justice Sotomayor. As Frank Pommersheim once said, the real practice of Indian law is in the trenches, as opposed to the high-stakes reality television of the Supreme Court. A perfect matchup for the final.

PLSI’s Heidi Nesbitt to be Honored by New Mexico Women’s Law Caucus

The Women’s Law Caucus is pleased to announce the 2015 Honorees of the Justice Mary Walters Award will be The Honorable Anne Kass and Heidi Nesbitt, Director of the Pre-Law Summer Institute (PLSI) and Assistant Director of the American Indian Law Center, Inc.

On February 27, 2015, the Justice Mary Walters Award Banquet will be held at the UNM School of Law, where they will honor both of these women for their distinguished careers and the lasting impact they have made in the New Mexico legal community.

3rd Annual Tribal Lands Conference @ University of Arizona

The University of Arizona Native Peoples Technical Assistance Office/Indigenous Peoples Law & Policy Program is hosting its 3rd Annual Tribal Lands Conference, scheduled for January 26th and 27th, 2015.

Indian Probate Seminar 2015_Agenda

Ninth Circuit Materials in Arce v. Huppenthal (Arizona’s Ethnic Studies Ban)

Here are the briefs:

Arizona Opening Brief

Plaintiffs Response Brief

Brief for Amici Curiae 48 Public School Teachers

Brief of Amicus Curiae Latina and Latino Critical Legal Theory, Inc.

Brief of Authors Rodolfo Acuña, Bill Bigelow, Richard Delgado, and Jean Stefancic as Amici Curiae

Brief of Chief Earl Warren Institute on Law and Social Policy

Brief of Freedom to Read Foundation

Brief of the National Education Association and Arizona Education Association as Amici Curiae

Brief Amicus Curiae of Pacific Legal Foundation in Support of Neither Party

Arizona Reply Brief

Oral argument video here.

News coverage here.

TT’s prior coverage here, here, and here.

Who Won American Indian Law and Policy in 2014? Final Four

It’s been a long strange trip but we’re down to the final four.

#1 Alaska Native tribes v. #2 Tribal Sovereign Immunity

Alaska Native tribes win again with 55 percent of the vote over Bay Mills Indian Community. The top overall seed defeated the Buena Vista Rancheria, the Omaha Tribe, and the Wisconsin Oneidas before facing Bay Mills.

Tribal sovereign immunity also advances with 74 percent of the vote over ICWA. Immunity knocked out alternative energy, American Indian education, and VAWA before taking out ICWA.

The matchup looks very similar for the Alaska tribal communities. In effect, Bay Mills gets a second chance at the prize, along with all the other tribes that have raised sovereign immunity this year. Westlaw says there are 16 tribal immunity cases from 2014 alone. Of course, there are 229 Alaska Native tribes.

#2 Justice Sotomayor v. #10 Tribal In-House Counsel Association

Justice Sotomayor wins out in the people bracket, narrowly eliminating Judge Humetewa with 54 percent of the vote. She eliminated the McAllen Grace Baptist Church, Frank Pommersheim, and the authors of Structuring Sovereignty before facing Judge Humetewa.

TICA is the big upstart in this inaugural tournament, winners of the groups bracket but the lowest seed remaining. Obviously, I underestimated their staggering power at the beginning. TICA squeaked by NABA and the Tribal Supreme Court Project before gathering steam and completely destroying the Carcieri challengers and the 1491s.

Hmm, this semifinal features one versus many, begging us to ask Spock’s stark question — do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one?