Last December, the federal court denied the Cherokee Nation’s motion to dismiss Vann v. Kempthorne. The Nation had argued that it was a necessary and indispensable party under FRCP 19. And, because it hadn’t waived its immunity, the Nation argued that the federal case must be dismissed. The United States argued that the case should be dismissed under the tribal court exhaustion doctrine. The court disagreed.
tribal courts
Village of Pender v. Parker — tribal court exhaustion case
Recently, a federal judge in Nebraska stayed a federal claim that the Omaha tribe has no authority to require on-reservation, non-Indian liquor vendors to obtain a tribal license to sell liquor.
The judge noted that this appears to be a question of first impression (“While the briefing has been excellent, neither side has given me a case that is squarely on point regarding whether exhaustion is required in these circumstances. As a result, I must read the ‘tea leaves.'”), but correctly stayed the case until the tribal court had a chance to opine on the jurisdiction questions.
The 2nd amended complaint is here: Complaint
The tribal motion to dismiss is here: Motion to Dismiss
The opposition is here: Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
The reply is here: Reply Brief
The court’s stay order and opinion is here: DCT Order Denying Motion to Dismiss
Turtle Talk 