Here are the materials so far in Kyle Grocery Inc. v. Short Horn (D.S.D.):
1-3 Oglala Trial Court Opinion


Here are the materials so far in Kyle Grocery Inc. v. Short Horn (D.S.D.):
1-3 Oglala Trial Court Opinion


Here are the materials in United States v. Anderson (S.D. Miss.):
Here is the complaint in Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe v. City of Seattle (Sauk-Suiattle Tribal Court):
From Stanford, here is “Imagining Justice: American Indian Tribal Laws of Criminal Responsibility.”
Kekek Jason Stark has published “Anishinaabe Inaakonigewin: Principles for the Intergenerational Preservation of Mino-Bimaadiziwin” in the Montana Law Review. PDF
I cannot recommend this paper enough. It’s exactly the kind of paper I’ve been waiting for — waiting for a very long time. Miigwetch to Professor Stark for this incredible work. The ancestors would be proud.

Merits Stage Materials
National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers Amicus Brief
Tribal Governments Amicus Brief
Cert Stage Materials
United States’ Brief in Opposition
Tenth Circuit Materials
United States v Denezpi Tenth Circuit Opinion
District Court Materials
1-1 Criminal Information Sheet
32 DCT Order Denying Motion to Dismiss on Double Jeopardy Grounds
Here are the materials in Monster Tech. Group v. Eller (W.D. Okla.):
1-3 Iowa Tribal Court Injunction
5 DCT Order Dismissing Complaint without Prejudice
Here is the opinion:
Briefs:
Keep in mind as to this case and the related Ninth Circuit case we posted a while ago here, this is about a nonmember sued by a tribe in tribal court for breach of contract, a nonmember who won before the tribal court, and now is suing the tribal judges, tribal employees, and the lawyers for the tribe for racketeering because the nonmember believes there was a conspiracy against him. The only reason this case exists is because of the Lewis v. Clarke decision (preceded by Ninth Circuit cases) that holds individuals who work for tribes sued in their individual capacities are not immune. Even if the nonmember’s claim here has validity (seems very unlikely but who knows?), this case is definitive proof that the Lewis v. Clarke precedent will allow absolutely frivolous contract and other claims to proceed against tribes on the Lewis v. Clarke fiction that tribal employees sued in their individual capacity are somehow not engaged in tribal governmental activity and that the tribes that indemnify their employees are doing so for reasons unrelated to tribal governmental prerogatives. Here, we’re talking tribal judges (including an associate judge who was not assigned the case), a court clerk, and lawyers retained by the tribe to merely serve as counsel for the tribe, among others. They might all win below, as the court here suggests, but they have to make the correct arguments in what appears to be a game of whack-a-mole.
Here are the materials so far in Eagle Bear Inc. v. Blackfeet Indian Nation (D. Mont.):
1-3 Blackfeet Tribal Court Complaint
5 Motion for Preliminary Injunction

You must be logged in to post a comment.