Very surprising! It is exceptionally rare for a private, non-Indian respondent that has won below to file a brief in support of a tribal cert petition.
Here is the brief: Kraus-Anderson Brief in Support of Petition
And the petition, with link to lower court materials.
Here: API Reply.
The petition (No. 10-613) is up for discussion in the Conference of Jan. 14, 2011.
Here is the article.
An excerpt:
The judicial system of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation is in limbo.
At its Nov. 20 regular meeting, the tribe’s National Council overrode a veto by Principal Chief A.D. Ellis and approved a bill that abolished the tribe’s district court and replaced it with three courts.
Each of the new courts focuses solely on one legal area, with one for criminal cases, one for civil cases and one for family cases. The tribe’s Supreme Court was not affected by the legislation.
National Council Speaker Roger Barnett said, “We had some concerns about people getting proper assistance in specific areas, so specific courts were established for those areas.”
Ellis had vetoed the bill Nov. 10, claiming that it violated the separation of powers clause in the tribe’s constitution. The council voted 20-5 to override the veto.
So far, no judges have been seated to oversee the new courts. Barnett said the Chief’s Office has 60 days from the legislation’s passage to make nominations or the council will do it.
In response to the legislation, Ellis sued the National Council in the tribe’s district court.
Here is the opinion in Pete v. Lac Vieux Desert Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians Tribal Council (Matha, J.):
Here is the press release, and several accompanying resolutions (Press Release MCN National Council). An excerpt from the press release:
This past weekend, on December 18,2010, the Muscogee(Creek) Nation National Council passed a resolution declining to recognize former District CourtJudge Patrick Moore as a legitimate court Judge of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation because he hasnot been confirmed by the National Council under the provisions of a newly established Court.On November 20,2010, the National Council abolished the former District Court and establishedthree new trial courts pursuant to their constitutional authority to establish inferior courts. As ofthat date, Principal Chief A.D. Ellis has not nominated any candidates to be a Judge. Theresolution states that, “Patrick Moore has no legal authority to continue serving as a Judge of theMuscogee (Creek) Nation and by continuing to hold himself out as a Judge of the Muscogee(Creek) Nation without any legal authority to do so could potentially put the legitimacy of allrulings and decisions issued by him as suspect and subject to challenge by litigants who appearbefore him.” According to the resolution, Moore was previously a Judge of the abolishedDistrict Court whose term expired on June 30, 2010 with no authority to act as a holdover Judgeunder Muscogee (Creek) Nation Law. The Resolution that confirmed Moore prohibits holdoverand Muscogee Law prohibits Moore from being paid. Pursuant to the Constitution andMuscogee laws, the Supreme Court is validly seated and at full strength, but there is not aproperly seated trial or inferior Court Judge at this time. The National Council is concernedabout the validity of Orders issued by Patrick Moore and has requested the Principal Chief tonominate a Judge consistent with the Laws of the Nation.
From the Bemidji Pioneer:
An $18,562,767.45 money judgment was recently awarded to the White Earth Band of Chippewa against Angelo Medure and Gaming World International, Ltd. (GWI).
The award culminates a 14-year struggle of the people of White Earth to recover illegal profit distributions made to Medure and Gaming World International. The legal action began in White Earth Tribal Court and then removed by GWI and Medure to Federal Court and then remanded back to Tribal Court by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Medure was found to have conspired with former White Earth Chairman Darrell “Chip” Wadena to deprive the people of White Earth the benefits of the White Earth Land Settlement Act (WELSA). Although agreement provisions between GWI and Wadena required that Medure provide management services for the construction, development and operation of the Shooting Star Casino, GWI had no employees at the Shooting Star Casino at any time. In spite of having no employees at Shooting Star Casino, GWI and Medure were paid $10,153,772.61 in profit distributions. The management agreement required GWI to pay back the White Earth Land Settlement Act (WELSA) funds before any profit distributions were made to GWI.
Voting on a proposed revision to the Hopi Constitution could violate village sovereignty and the results might create an ill-conceived fourth branch of government, according to a former Hopi Tribal Court chief judge.
“The Hopi Constitution was a historical agreement between the villages and Hopi central government,” Gary LaRance said.
In Hopi there are two separate governments – the central government, termed “the Hopi Tribe,” and the Hopi villages with their own inherent sovereignty. Each village is to determine for itself its own organization, he said.
About 75 years ago, at the time of the Indian Reorganization Act, Hopi and Tewa villages in northeastern Arizona decided that they wanted the Hopi central government to be their voice to the outside world but that they wanted to remain apart from it internally, he said.
LaRance is among those calling for a halt to a vote requested by the tribal council and scheduled by the BIA for Jan. 27, 2011. A delay is sought to provide more time to consider what amendments should be made to the IRA-era constitution that over the years has posed problems in the villages’ relationship to the central government.
Here: Sac and Fox Cert Opp.
Here are the materials in Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District v. Lee (D. Ariz.):
Navajo Exhaustion Motion to Dismiss
Navajo Rule 19 Motion to Dismiss
Salt River Motion for Summary Judgment
This case is on remand from the Ninth Circuit — and that order is here.
Here: Miccosukee v Kraus-Anderson Cert Petition
Question presented:
This case presents an important question regarding the recognition and enforcement of Indian tribal court judgments in the federal courts. The question presented is whether an action to obtain recognition of a tribal court judgment presents a federal question under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, based on the common law and the federal character of Indian law, and whether the Eleventh Circuit was incorrect in its holding, which conflicts with other circuit court and Supreme Court precedents, that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to enforce the Miccosukee Tribal Court judgment in this case.
Lower court materials here.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.