Tribal Codes – Page 28

In an appeal from Ada County, the Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the district court that the State of Idaho can regulate the importation of cigarettes onto reservations located in Idaho and that the State has personal jurisdiction over non-resident defendant Native Wholesale Supply Company. The Supreme Court reversed the district court’s decision that Native Wholesale Supply Company is required to obtain a wholesaler permit for its sales to a tribal-owned retailer on the Coeur d’Alene reservation.

News coverage here.

New Paper on the Availability of Tribal Law

August 14, 2013August 15, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Bonnie J. Shucha posted her paper, “Whatever Tribal Precedent There May Be’: The (Un)Availability of Tribal Law” on SSRN. Here is the abstract:

This article explores the costs and benefits of publishing tribal law. Part I analyzes why tribal law is not more widely available; part II illustrates the benefits of making tribal law more accessible, and part III describes publication options for tribes. An appendix lists currently available tribal law collections.

WSJ on New York’s Suit against Indian Country Payday Lenders

August 13, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here. Excerpt:

Courts have long upheld that tribal-owned businesses enjoy the same sovereign immunity as tribal governments and aren’t subject to state law. Matthew Fletcher, director of Michigan State University’s Indigenous Law and Policy Center, said the ownership structure of a firm has bearing on its legal defenses in such situations. Lenders owned by an individual member of a tribe but not deemed to be owned by the tribe itself would have less ground in attempting to block lawsuits or other state action, he said.

“I would assume the tribe and the tribal entity would respond by saying you don’t have jurisdiction over the tribal nation,” Mr. Fletcher said.

NLRB Sixth Circuit Brief in LRB v. NRLB

August 12, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

2013-08-12 NLRB Brief for Respondent

Opening brief and amicus briefs are here.

Update in Nooksack Disenrollment Matter — Second Amended Complaint Dismissed

August 8, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here are additional materials in Lomeli v. Kelly (Nooksack Tribal Court):

Kelly Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss

Nooksack Plaintiffs’ Response in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss

Kelly Defendants’ Reply on Motion to Dismiss

Order Granting Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint 8-6-2013

An excerpt:

As Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs Kevin Washburn wrote recently, “in the exercise of sovereignty and self-governance, tribes have the right, like other governments, to make good decisions, bad decisions, and decisions with which others may not agree.” Aguayo, page 1. The Tribal Council members named in this Complaint hold an obligation to act in the best interests of the Nooksack Indian Tribe. Membership and enrollment decisions impact individual lives in the deepest possible ways and those decisions cannot be taken lightly. This Court recognizes the serious implications of this case and its decision on this motion and all the others that have preceded it. It is the solemn obligation of this Court to follow the law of the Nooksack Indian Tribe and it is the obligation of the Tribal Council to do the same.

Update in Inetianbor v. Cash Call (Western Sky Financial) — Arbitrator Alleged Biased — Court Finds Irrelevant

June 21, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here are the new materials:

Inetianbor Motion to Reconsider

Cashhcall Opposition

Inetianbor Reply in Support of Reconsideration

DCT Order Denying Motion

An excerpt:

Here, Plaintiff asserts that he has uncovered two new pieces of evidence that indicate that Mr. Chasing Hawk is biased toward CashCall. First, Plaintiff claims that Mr. Chasing Hawk’s daughter, Shannon Chasing Hawk, is employed by Western Sky. Plaintiff has attached what he claims is a printout of Ms. Chasing Hawk’s Facebook profile page, listing “Western Sky Financial” as her employer. See DE 61 at 9. He further alleges that Mr. Chasing Hawk has “10+ kids and every single one of them has either worked for, currently works at CashCall or one of its subsidiaries . . . or had illegally attempted to conduct an unsuccessful arbitration for the defendant.” DE 67 at 2 n.1. Second, Plaintiff alleges that CashCall and Mr. Chasing Hawk have colluded in the initiation of arbitration proceedings. Plaintiff attaches what he claims is an email chain between Mr. Chasing Hawk and an employee of Lakota Cash, LLC (“Lakota Cash”), a subsidiary of Western Sky, which purportedly shows that Lakota Cash prepared the letter for Mr. Chasing Hawk. See id. at 7-8. Plaintiff further claims that he called Mr. Chasing Hawk, and that Mr. Chasing Hawk admitted during the phone call that CashCall had prepared the letter for him. Plaintiff represents that he has tried calling Mr. Chasing Hawk again, but that he told Plaintiff that “I am not able to talk to you because cash call (sic) will get mad. You have to call the attorney, sorry.” Id. at 3.

Prior order here.