sovereign immunity

Here are the materials in Quinault Indian Nation v. Pearson.

The court’s syllabus:

In an action brought by the Quinault Indian Nation alleging a scheme to defraud the Nation of cigarette taxes, the panel affirmed the district court’s dismissal of counterclaims as barred by the Nation’s sovereign immunity.

The panel held that if brought in a separate suit against the Nation, the counterclaims would be barred by sovereign immunity. Asserting the claims as counterclaims did not change the sovereign-immunity analysis. The panel concluded that the Nation did not waive its sovereign immunity because it filed the underlying suit but took no further action that unequivocally waived its immunity to the counterclaims, and the counterclaims did not qualify as claims for recoupment.

Materials in Cherokee Nation Trust Breach Claims against Interior

August 29, 2017August 29, 2017Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials so far in Cherokee Nation v. Dept. of Interior (W.D. Okla.):

1 Complaint

51-1 Motion to Dismiss

55 Cherokee Motion to Strike Exhibits

58 US Response to Motion to Strike

59 Cherokee Reply in Support of Motion to Strike

63 Cherokee Response to Motion to Dismiss

Virginia Federal Court Confirms Immunity of Tribal Sovereign Lending Entity

August 28, 2017August 28, 2017Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Howard v. Plain Green (E.D. Va.):

Federal Court Rules in Favor of Stillaguamish Tribe in Dispute with State of Washington over Apparent/Actual Authority to Waive Tribal Immunity

August 14, 2017Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here are the materials in Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians v. State of Washington (W.D. Wash.):

26 State Motion for Summary Judgment

28 Tribe Motion for Summary J

Florida COA Affirms Tribal Immunity Defense in Miccosukee Tribe v. Lewis & Tein

August 9, 2017September 7, 2017Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the opinion.

An excerpt:

“There are reasons to doubt the wisdom of perpetuating the doctrine” of tribal immunity. Kiowa Tribe of Oklahoma v. Mfg. Techs., Inc., 523 U.S. 751, 758 (1998). It “can harm those who are unaware that they are dealing with a tribe, who do not know of tribal immunity, or who have no choice in the matter, as in the case of tort victims.” Id. No one knows this more than Guy Lewis and Michael Tein. The Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida, according to Lewis and Tein’s complaint, spent five years filing false lawsuits, suborning perjury, and obstructing justice, in an effort to damage the attorneys’ finances, reputations, and law firm. Whatever its wisdom, tribal immunity endures, and Indian tribes are not subject to the civil jurisdiction of our courts absent a clear, explicit, and unmistakable waiver of tribal sovereign immunity or a congressional abrogation of that immunity. Because neither exception to tribal immunity has been established in this case, we reverse the trial court’s denial of the Miccosukee Tribe’s motion to dismiss.

UPDATE (9/7/17):