sovereign immunity – Page 83

Binger Operations, LLC (“Binger”) filed this interpleader action against Brenda Shemayme Edwards, Phillip M. Smith, and the Caddo Tribal Council, seeking a determination of the respective rights of the defendants in interpleader (“defendants”) to receive oil and gas severance taxes. Both Mr. Smith and Ms. Edwards claim to be the Chairman of the Caddo Nation, and both have purported to file documents on behalf of the Caddo Tribal Council.¹ Mr. Smith and, according to his/its motion, the Caddo Tribal Council, have moved to dismiss pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1) for lack of subjectmatter jurisdiction. Ms. Edwards and, according to her/its response, the Caddo Tribal Council, have responded in support of the motion to the extent that it challenges this court’s jurisdiction. Binger has responded, and the motions are at issue.

Minnesota Supreme Court Affirms Tribal Immunity in City of Duluth v. Fond du Lad Band — UPDATED with Briefs

March 12, 2014March 12, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the opinion in City of Duluth vs. Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians. Link to oral argument video here. ~~Briefs are not available publicly, so if anyone has them, please send along.~~

Here are the briefs:

08 26 13 FDL Initial Brief – FINAL

09 30 13 City of Duluth Response Brief

10 14 13 FDL Reply

An excerpt:

When an Indian band enters into a contract with a city, waives its sovereign immunity, and consents to be sued only in federal district court, a state court may go no further than interpreting contractual provisions pertaining to jurisdiction to determine whether the court has jurisdiction over a dispute arising under the contract.

Our post with a link to the Minnesota Court of Appeals decision, now reversed, is here.

FTC Wins Another Motion in Suit against Various Tribal Payday Lenders

March 10, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here are the updated materials in Federal Trade Commission v. AMG (D. Nev.):

444 MJ Report

448 Little Axe Objection

449 AMG et al Objection

451 FTC Response

559 DCT Order Adopting MJ Report

Prior post in this part of the litigation is here. The post related to the partial settlement is here. Other posts are here and here.

Sixth Circuit Denies Sault Tribe Motion to Reconsider Stay

March 7, 2014March 7, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here:

CA6 Order Denying Reconsideration

Prior posts on the stay are here and here. Panel materials here.

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.