Here is the petition:
Question presented:
Whether the Alaska Supreme Court correctly held that Congress intended the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act to delegate the Secretary of the Interior authority to create more than 200 “federally recognized tribes” in Alaska by publishing a list of Native Entities in the Federal Register.
Here is yesterday’s order:
The court stated:
On the day before oral argument, Plaintiff filed a supplemental statement of facts, including thirteen new exhibits, purportedly showing bad faith on the part of the tribe. Doc. 21. Plaintiff asserted for the first time at oral argument that this new information and the proffered testimony from the chairwoman of the tribal council would show that the bad faith exception applies. See Redwolf, 196 F.3d at 1065 (a party is exempt from exhausting its claims in tribal court where “an assertion of tribal jurisdiction is motivated by a desire to harass or is conducted in bad faith”).
By raising this issue at the last minute, Plaintiff has provided the Court with no briefing on the contours of the bad faith exception and has afforded Defendants little meaningful opportunity to respond. The Court cannot conclude that the bad faith exception applies on such an incomplete record. Because Plaintiff’s bad faith argument appears to be colorable, the Court will afford the parties an opportunity to brief the issue. The parties should address relevant case law on the bad faith exception, what evidentiary showing of bad faith is required, and the evidence each side claims in support of its position. Because time is important in Plaintiff’s claim, the Court will require the briefing in short order.
Materials are here:
This disputes arises out of an alleged breach of a gaming machine lease agreement, and an alleged waiver of tribal immunity needed to enforce the agreement. Currently, the Tribe’s motion to remand the case back to state court is pending.
Here are the materials so far in Apache Tribe of Oklahoma v. TGS Anadarko (W.D. Okla.):
And here are the related state court materials:
Here.
Here are the materials in this update to Grondal v. United States (E.D. Wash.):
An excerpt from the court’s order:
Plaintiffs filed their Complaint on January 21, 2009. Plaintiffs have acquired memberships in and are tenants/occupants of the Mill Bay Resort, a campground located on Lake Chelan in Chelan County, Washington. The Mill Bay Resort exists on real property known as Moses Allotment No.8, also known as Indian Allotment 151-MA-8 (“MA_8”), which consists of approximately 174.26 acres on the shores of Lake Chelan. MA-8 is part of an original allotment authorized under the Moses Agreement of July 7, 1883 as ratified by 23 Stat. 79-80, July 4, 1884 and conveyed to Wapato John through two trust patents. The history of the creation ofMA-8 and other Moses Agreement allotments has been discussed elsewhere, including in this court’s decision on summary judgment (ECF No. 144), in Wapato Heritage, LLC v. U.S., 637 F.3d 1033 (9th Cir. 2011), and in U.S. v. La Chappelle, 81 F. 152 (C.C. 12 Wash. 1897), United States v. Moore, 161 F. 513 (9th Cir. 1908), and Starr v. Long Jim, 227 13 U.S. 613 (1913).
Here are the materials in Wiseman v. Osage Indian Agency (E.D. Va.):
Here are the materials in Challinor v. United States (E.D. Wash.), where the court concludes:
In summary, because the Estate’s FTCA negligence claims colorably fall within FECA’s scope, the Court must dismiss this lawsuit for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. See Moe, 326 F.3d at 1068 (requiring dismissal of a claim that is “colorably within” FECA’s scope). Although the United States may face liability under the FTCA if an injury occurs to a non-Job-Corps participant at YFP because that individual may not be a federal employee, the Court recognizes this question is not before it at this time. The Court is hopeful that the BIA and YFP take the appropriate necessary steps to ensure that all workers, especially those young Job Corps students with so much life ahead, are not subjected to such serious safety violations. See Marly’s Bear Med. v. United States, 241 F.3d 1208, 1216-17 (9th Cir. 2000) (finding that fatal injuries to anon-federal employee during a logging operation conducted pursuant to a BIA contract were recoverable under the FTCA because the BIA’s responsibility to ensure that safety precautions were implemented was not a discretionary function). The Court is also hopeful that Congress will soon address the shameful inadequacy of FECA’s $10,000.00 death gratuity payment. While the law required this decision, the Court sympathizes with Mr. Challinor’s parents for the loss of their son.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.