Here are the materials in Dillon v. BMO Harris Bank (N.D. Okla.):
3 Otoe-Missouria Tribe of Indians Motion to Quash
Here are the materials in Dillon v. BMO Harris Bank (N.D. Okla.):
3 Otoe-Missouria Tribe of Indians Motion to Quash
Materials and documents for the leave to appeal in Michigan’s Supreme Court:
Defendant/Appellant’s Application for Leave to Appeal
Plaintiff-Appellee’s Brief in Opposition to Application for Leave to Appeal
Defendant/Appellant’s Brief In Reply To Opposition
Amicus brief in support of petition from State Bar’s American Indian Law Section
Our motion for leave to file and our lodged amicus brief in support of petition
Opinion and Order Granting Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and Dismissing Complaint in the matter of Whiting v. Eagle Bear (Jan. 22 2016).
William Whiting claimed constitutional violations, but the district court found it did not have jurisdiction to hear the case and defendants are immune. Whiting must use administrative remedies.
Here is the opinion in Brown v. Officer K. Robertson #Y234 (Ariz. Ct. App.):
Here are the materials in Alabama-Quassarte Tribal Town v. United States (E.D. Okla.):
Here is the opinion in Flute v. United States.
An excerpt:
This case arises out of an ignominious event in the history of this Nation. In 1864, the United States Army conducted an unprovoked attack on a group of unarmed Indians, who had relocated to an area next to the Sand Creek River in the Territory of Colorado at the direction and under the protection of the Territorial Governor. When what has become known as the Sand Creek Massacre was over, most of the Indians were dead, including many women and children. After an investigation, the United States publicly acknowledged its role in the tragedy and agreed to pay reparations to certain survivors of the massacre. But those reparations were never paid.
Plaintiffs are descendants of the victims of the 1864 Sand Creek Massacre and bring this action for an accounting of the amounts they allege the U.S. government holds in trust for payment of reparations to their ancestors. Because the United States has not waived its sovereign immunity, we affirm the district court’s dismissal of such for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Briefs here.
Here are the materials in State of Kansas ex rel. Schmidt v. National Indian Gaming Commission (D. Kan.):
Order and Memorandum in re Zaunbrecher v. Succession of David, 2015-769 (La. App. 3 Cir. 12/9/15) here.
An appeals court affirmed the Paragon Casino’s immunity from suit for the death of Blake Zaunbrecher, who was killed by a drunk driving patron in 2013. However, the court reversed the decision to extend that immunity to its employees. It found that the bartender and security guards could have a personal duty to the decedent that will make them personally liable. It remanded the case to the 12th Judicial District Court to decide whether to stay all proceedings until resolution of a similar suit in Tribal court.
Here are the materials in Eagleman v. Rocky Boys’ Chippewa-Cree Tribal Business Committee (D. Mont.):
16-3 Eagleman Trial Court Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
16-5 Eagleman Tribal Appellate Brief
You must be logged in to post a comment.