sovereign immunity

Snoqualmie Tribal Leadership Dispute in Federal Court

Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here is the news article. An excerpt:

A federal judge might be the last hope for banished members of the Snoqualmie Tribe who appeared in court Tuesday in their effort to regain tribal membership.

U.S. District Court Judge James L. Robart said he would issue a written ruling later as to whether the case is even properly before him or should be dismissed.

Only then — if he rules in favor of the banished members — would he get to the merits of the case.

And here are the materials:

petition-for-writ-of-habeas-corpus

snoqualmie-rule-19-motion-to-dismiss [!!!]

snoqualmie-motion-to-dismiss

plaintiffs-response-to-motion-to-dismiss

snoqualmie-reply-brief

Yet Another Opinion from CA9 in the Blackfeet Housing Authority Case

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here it is.

Here is the relevant change:

In our earlier opinions, we declined to require Plaintiffs to exhaust their tribal court remedies. Instead, we held that the Blackfeet Tribe had waived tribal immunity through the enabling ordinance that established the Housing Authority. Marceau II, 519 F.3d at 842-44; Marceau I, 455 F.3d at 978-83; see also Kiowa Tribe of Okla. v. Mfg. Techs., Inc., 523 U.S. 751, 754 (1998) (noting that “an Indian tribe is subject to suit only where Congress has authorized the suit or the tribe has waived its immunity”). Our doing so was in error, and we now vacate that holding and decline to reach the issue. Whether or not the Tribe waived tribal immunity, the tribal court must have the first opportunity to address all issues within its jurisdiction, including that one.

Hollywood Mobile Estates v. Seminole Tribe — Sovereign Immunity

Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

In Hollywood Mobile Estates v. Seminole Tribe, the Florida Southern District Court refused to grant an emergency motion for a preliminary injunction against the tribe. The court reasoned it is unlikely that the plaintiff will succeed in its claims against the tribe because the tribe has raised sovereign immunity as a defense. The underlying dispute is over a lease.

dct-order-denying-motion-for-prelim-injunction

hollywood-motion-for-prelim-injunction

seminole-opposition-to-motion

hollywood-reply

And here is the still pending motion to dismiss — seminole-motion-to-dismiss

BMG v. Chukchansi Casino — Tribal Sovereign Immunity

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

In the September 12, 2007 order, the district court granted the motion to dismiss as to the Chukchansi Indian Tribe, but left open the question as to whether sovereign immunity applied to the tribe’s economic development entity. In the August 6, 2008 order, the court held the entity was not entitled to sovereign immunity.

Here are the relevant briefs and materials:

amended-complaint

casino-motion-to-dismiss

bmg-resp-to-motion-to-dismiss

bmg-motion-for-reconsideration

Kemp v. Osage Nation Cert Opposition Brief

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

This case, which I suspect has a fairly good chance of being granted, involves the Osage Nation’s successful suit against the Oklahoma Tax Commission to declare its Indian Country boundaries. The cert petition post is here, which includes the lower court decision and the relevant briefs. Here is the opposition brief.

osage-cert-opp-brief

D.C. Circuit Decides Freedmen Case

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

The D.C. Circuit reversed the lower court’s determination that the 13th Amendment abrogated tribal sovereign immunity, but held that the Ex parte Young doctrine allows a suit against Cherokee Nation tribal officials to proceed.

Here is the opinion.

Here are the D.C. Circuit briefs.

Mullins v. Sycuan Band — Tort Claim Dismissed

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

This can be what happens when you sue someone while represented by an attorney who is not licensed in the proper state bar. The court dismissed the tort claim against the tribe because the attorney wasn’t licensed in California, but noted it would have dismissed the claim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, too.

dct-order-to-show-cause

mullins-v-sycuan-band-dct-order

Hendrix v. Coffee — Comanche Membership Dispute

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in this case, dismissed on the basis that the federal court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.

hendrix-complaint

comanche-motion-to-dismiss

hendrix-brief

hendrix-v-coffee-dct-opinion

PPI v. Kempthorne – Denial of Injunction against Seminole Hard Rock Bingo

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the order re: PPI’s request for an injunction in light of the Florida House v. Crist ruling. It was denied — once again, my favorite rule — Rule 19 — came into play. [Thanks to T.W.]

ppi-v-kempthorne-july-8-order

PPI’s complaint and request for an injunction is here.

gov-crist-opposition

federal-opposition

ppi-reply

Hunt Construction Group v. Oneida Indian Nation

Kate Fort

In this short order, the Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court reads the tribal waiver of sovereign immunity closely, holding that while the portion of the contract that reads

defendant “hereby expressly, unequivocally, and irrevocably waives its sovereign immunity from suit solely for the limited purpose of enforcement of the terms of this Agreement”

does indeed waive the Nation’s sovereign immunity in this matter, the portion that reads

[defendant] hereby consents to submit to personal jurisdiction of those courts of the State of New York and of the United States with competent subject matter jurisdiction located in the City of Syracuse, New York and the parties agree that all actions related to this Agreement shall be brought or defended in such courts ” (emphasis added).

means that the suit can only be brought in the City of Syracuse, not in Oneida County. This order overturns the lower court ruling which denied dismissal.

Hunt Construction Group v. Oneida Indian Nation