sovereign immunity – Page 83

Second Circuit Briefs in Stockbridge-Munsee Community Lands Claims

February 26, 2014February 28, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here are the briefs in Stockbridge-Munsee Community v. State of New York:

Stockbridge-Munsee Brief

Oneida Indian Nation Brief

State Brief

Stockbridge-Munsee Reply Brief

Lower court materials are here.

First Circuit Reverses Contempt Citation against Narragansett Indian Tribal Historic Preservation Office

February 26, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion in the sealed case In re Grand Jury Proceedings:

13-2498-01A

An excerpt:

A venerable legal Latinism, lex non cogit ad impossibilia, teaches that the law does not compel the impossible. Guided by that august adage, we hold that a subpoena duces tecum compelling the production of documents to a now-defunct grand jury cannot be enforced by civil contempt sanctions before a successor grand jury, and we accordingly vacate the district court’s order holding the appellant in civil contempt. We reject, however, the appellant’s additional contentions that tribal sovereign immunity shielded it from subpoena and that the subpoena was unreasonably broad in scope.

A cautionary note about raising tribal immunity from a federal subpoena:

For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that the subpoena duces tecum was unenforceable after the expiration of the issuing grand jury. We therefore vacate the district court’s order holding NITHPO in civil contempt. In the event a subpoena similar in scope is subsequently issued and NITHPO again challenges its validity, our holdings on tribal sovereign immunity and reasonableness of the subpoena shall apply to any such proceeding.

Additional Update in Luckerman v. Narragansett

February 13, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are additional materials in Luckerman v. Narragansett Indian Tribe (D. R.I.):

29 Motion to Correct the Record

33-1 Response

34 DCT Order on Amending the Record

Meanwhile, the tribe has appealed the sovereign immunity issue here to the First Circuit.

Prior posts on this case are here and here.

Updates to Various Nooksack Disenrollment Cases

February 10, 2014February 10, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here are the new materials in St. Germain v. Kelly — the Christmas TRO:

St Germain v Kelly Denial Order on Motion for Order to Show Cause Re Contempt

St Germain v Kelly Motion for Order to Show Cause Re Contempt

St. Germain v Kelly Declaration of Agripina Smith

St Germain v Kelly Declaration of Leah Zapata

St. Germain v Kelly Response to Plaintiffs’ Motion of Order to Show Cause Re Contempt

Here are the new materials in Adams v. Kelly I:

Adams v Kelli I Order Granting Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss

Adams v Kelly I Motion to Dismiss

Adams v Kelly I Plaintiffs’ Response to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss

Adams v Kelly I Reply to Plaintiffs’ Response to Motion to Dismiss

Here are the new materials in Adams v. Kelly II — MLK removal of two council members:

Adams v Kelly II Order Denying Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary InjunctionWrit of Mandamus

Adams v Kelly II Councilperson Michelle Roberts Declaration

Adams v Kelly II Declaration of Chairman Robert Kelly Jr

Adams v Kelly II Motion for Preliminary Injunction-Writ of Mandamus

Adams v Kelly II Reply Re Motion for Preliminary Injunction-Writ of Mandamus

Adams v Kelly II Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction – Writ of Mandamus

And an order in Lomeli v. Kelly:

Lomeli v Kelly Order Denying Motion for Order to Show Cause Re- Contempt

Ninth Circuit Rejects FTCA/Bivens Claims against Federal & Tribal Officers

February 10, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here is the unpublished opinion in Dupris v. McDonald.

An excerpt:

In 2006, Jesse Dupris and Jeremy Reed (the “Plaintiffs”) were arrested on tribal charges for assaults they did not commit. In 2008, they commenced this action against the members of the federal Task Force that arrested them and the United States under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), and the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b)(1), 2671-2680. The district court granted summary judgment for the defendants and Plaintiffs have appealed. We affirm, concluding that: (1) the Plaintiffs’ claims against two members of the Task Force are barred by the applicable statute of limitations; (2) the remaining individual defendants were entitled to qualified immunity; and (3) the United States is immune from liability under the FTCA pursuant to the discretionary function exception.

Briefs and lower court materials here.

Federal Court Holds Tribal Courts May Adjudicate Claims against On-Rez Public Schools in North Dakota

February 6, 2014February 5, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher4 Comments

Here are the materials in Belcourt Public School District v. Davis (D. N.D.):

19 Belcourt Motion for Summary J

19-6 TMAC Appellate Decision

26 Defendants Response

27 Belcourt Reply

33 DCT Order

And here is the opinion in Fort Yates Public School District #4 v. Murphy (D. N.D.):

40 DCT Order

We posted materials in this matter here.

Ninth Circuit Affirms Rule 19 Dismissal in Friends of Amador County v. Jewell

January 30, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher5 Comments

Here is the unpublished opinion. An excerpt:

The district court concluded next that joinder would not be feasible because the Tribe enjoys sovereign immunity as a federally recognized Indian tribe. Appellants challenge the validity of the Tribe’s federally recognized status but concede its existence. Indeed, the Tribe has been federally recognized since at least 1985, see Indian Tribal Entities Recognized and Eligible to Receive Services, 50 Fed. Reg. 6055-02 (Feb. 13, 1985), and it thus has “the immunities and privileges available to other federally acknowledged Indian tribes by virtue of their government-to-government relationship with the United States,” Indian Entities Recognized and Eligible to Receive Services from the Board of Indian Affairs, 77 Fed. Reg. 47,868-01 (Aug. 10, 2012).

Briefs and link to oral argument audio here.

Lower court materials here.

Ute Tribe Prevails in Tenth Circuit Immunity Decision on Third Party Subpoenas/Collateral Order Doctrine

January 28, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here are the materials in Bonnet v. Ute Indian Tribe:

CA10 Opinion

An excerpt:

The issue before us is whether a subpoena duces tecum served on a non-party Tribe and seeking documents relevant to a civil suit in federal court is itself a “suit” against the Tribe triggering tribal sovereign immunity. Exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, pursuant to the collateral order doctrine, we hold the answer is yes. We therefore reverse the district court’s denial of the Tribe’s motion to quash based on tribal immunity.

And the briefs:

Ute Opening Brief

Bonnet Brief

Ute Reply

Lower court materials here.