Here is the opinion in Oberloh v. Johnson, a case arising out of the Lower Sioux Indian Community. An excerpt:
In this consolidated appeal arising out of two defamation suits against a tribal treasurer, appellant argues that the district court erred by denying summary judgment with respect to his sovereign immunity and absolute privilege defenses. Because appellant is entitled to invoke sovereign immunity for conduct arising out of his official authority as tribal treasurer, we reverse.
Here is the opinion in Big Lagoon Rancheria v. California — DCT Order Denying Cal Motion to Dismiss
The materials:
California Motion for Judgment on Pleadings
Big Lagoon Rancheria Opposition Brief
An excerpt:
Expanding its decision in Cossey v. Cherokee Nation, the Oklahoma Supreme Court held that state courts have jurisdiction over tort claims against tribal casinos in the companion cases Griffith v. Choctaw Casino of Pocola and Dye v. Choctaw Casino of Pocola. An excerpt from Griffith:
We recently handed down our opinion in Cossey v. Cherokee Nation Enterprises, LLC, 2009 OK 6, — P.3d —-, (mandate issued June 11, 2009), holding that the state district court is a court of competent jurisdiction as that phrase is used in the Cherokee Nation’s tribal gaming compact. Today, in separate opinions in this case and in the related case of Dye v. Choctaw Casino of Pocola, Oklahoma,2009 OK 52, we determine that Oklahoma district courts are courts of competent jurisdiction as that phrase is used in Oklahoma’s statutory model tribal gaming compact and therefore the state courts may exercise jurisdiction over the tort claims against the Choctaw Nation and its casino in Pocola, Oklahoma.
Here is the opinion in Murgia v. Reed — Murgia v. Reed (9th 2009)
Our earlier post on this case is here (including lower court materials and appellate briefs).
Thanks to T.M.!
Here is the New Mexico Court of Appeals opinion in Holguin v. Tsay Corp. An excerpt:
We can see no basis on which the district court could have appropriately denied Tsay’s motion to dismiss as to the two counts of invasion of privacy. Holguin has presented no argument or authority that overcomes the controlling law requiring physical injury or damage. We are unpersuaded by Holguin’s argument that use of his name and likeness is no different than if he were robbed of his jewelry and money at gunpoint. We leave that hypothetical, which, unlike the present case, involves threat, risk, and potential of physical harm, for another day. Presently, we are dealing solely with an alleged emotional injury resulting from an alleged inchoate, incorporeal invasion of his privacy. We cannot characterize Holguin’s claim as one for damages for physical injury to himself or physical damage to property, and thus cannot characterize the claim as one for bodily injury or property damage.
Here is the district court order in Absentee Shawnee v. Combs (W.D. Okla.) — Absentee Shawnee DCT Order.
The tribe had been the defendant in Bittle v. Bahe, in which the Oklahoma Supreme Court held 7-2 that dram shop actions filed against tribal casino operations are not barred by tribal sovereign immunity. The tribe brought this action in federal court to force the dismissal of the state court action, but failed. Here are the materials:
Here is Gabe Galanda’s new article on doing sports business in Indian Country — Entertainment and Sports Lawyer
Here is the district court order in Warren v. United States (W.D. N.Y.) — DCT Order re Seneca Amicus Motion
Here is the motion — Obama Motion to Dismiss
From BLT:
Justice Department lawyers have moved to dismiss claims against the government in a lawsuit over the remains of the legendary Apache warrior Geronimo.
In February, a group of Native Americans claiming to have descended from the 19th century military leader sued the government, as well as Yale University and the Order of the Skull and Bones, in an attempt to retrieve Geronimo’s remains. After his death in 1909, Geronimo’s body was buried at the Fort Sill United States Army Base in Lawton, Oklahoma. But according to popular lore, members of the Yale secret society broke into his tomb and stole his skull, which it now keeps on display in New Haven.
Here is the opinion in Smale v. NORTEP, a Washington Court of Appeals (Div. 1) case involving the Stillaguamish Tribe. Here is an excerpt:
The Smales sought to quiet title to property they claimed they had acquired through adverse possession and named Noretep, the original non-Indian owners, as defendants. After the Smales sued, Noretep deeded the disputed property to the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians (the Tribe), and the Smales named the Tribe as a defendant. In its unsuccessful motion to dismiss, the Tribe claimed that tribal sovereign immunity deprived the superior court of subject matter jurisdiction. Because courts exercise in rem jurisdiction over the property subject to quiet title actions, our Supreme Court has held that transferring the disputed property to a tribal sovereign does not bar the continued exercise of subject matter jurisdiction over the property. Accordingly, we hold that the superior court’s continuing jurisdiction over the land claimed by the Smales for the purposes of determining ownership does not offend the Tribe’s sovereignty.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.