Here is the order in Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians v. Burnette Foods Inc. (W.D. Mich.):
Prior post here.
GTB Wins Suit against Polluter
treaty rights
Michigan Federal Allows GTB Suit against Polluter to Proceed
Here are the materials in Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians v. Burnette Foods Inc. (W.D. Mich.):
Yakama Citizen Sues Government over Tariffs Citing 1855 Treaty
Here is the complaint in Lumley v. United States Customs and Border Protection (D. Or.):
Blast from the (recent, but what feels like a loooong time ago) Past: Interior Dept. Report on Impacts of Federal Dams on Salmon in the PNW
Ninth Circuit Rejects Stillaguamish Effort to Expand U&A Territory [U.S. v. Washington Subproceeding 17-03]
Here is the unpublished opinion in Stillaguamish Indian Tribe v. Upper Skagit Indian Tribe.
Briefs here.
Nez Perce Tribe Sues over Approval of Open Pit Gold Mine
Here is the complaint in Nez Perce Tribe v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (D. Idaho):
Muscogee (Creek) Nation Supreme Court Holds Creek Freedmen & Descendants Entitled to Same Rights as Other Creek Citizens
Ninth Circuit Materials in Stillaguamish v. Upper Skagit [U.S. v. Washington Subproceeding 17-03]
Unkechauge Indian Nation v. Seggos Cert Petition
Here:
Questions presented:
Whether the District Court violated Petitioners’ due process rights by granting summary judgment without first fulfilling its gatekeeping obligation under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), to rule on the parties’ pending motions to exclude or limit expert testimony?
Whether the District Court erred by relying on the Respondents’ expert witness in its summary judgment decision without first addressing the Petitioners’ motion to exclude or limit Respondents’ expert’s testimony under Daubert?
Whether the District Court violated Petitioners’ due process rights by failing to conduct an in camera review of 4,780 documents withheld by Respondents under claims of privilege, despite having ordered such a review and having possession of the documents since May 2019?
Whether the Court improperly analyzed the Andros Treaty by not finding the Treaty ambiguous and conducting the Indian Canons analysis?
Whether the Court misapprehended the law in finding the Andros Treaty not valid under Federal law?
Lower court materials here.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.