Federal Court Dismisses Miss. Choctaw from FTCA Claim, Claim against US Proceeds

Here are the materials in Chipmon v. United States (S.D. Miss.):

42 MBCI Motion to Dismiss

43 Memo in Support

42-1 MBCI v Peebles Opinion

42-2 Sharp v MBCI Opinion

50 DCT Order

Prior post here.

Federal Court Dismisses Suit against Duck Valley Tribe for Failure to Exhaust

Here are the materials in Magee v. Shoshone Paiute Tribes of the Duck Valley Reservation (D. Nev.):

1 Complaint

10 Motion to Dismiss

10-1 Tribal Court Record

16 Response

25 Reply

26 Surreply

28 Objection to Surreply

40 DCT Order

Ninth Circuit Finds No Navajo Jurisdiction over Off-Rez Insurer

Here is the unpublished opinion inย Employers Mutual Casualty Company v. McPaul.

Briefs here.

New Book: “The Cherokee Supreme Court 1823โ€“1835”

From Carolina Academic Press, here (h/t Legal History Blog):

The Cherokee Supreme Court

1823โ€“1835

byย J. Matthew Martin

Forthcoming April 2020ย โ€ขย paper

ISBN 978-1-5310-1841-2
e-ISBN 978-1-5310-1842-9

Tags:ย Indian and Indigenous Peoples Law,ย Legal History,ย Regional Interest


The first legal history of the first tribal court upends long-held misconceptions about the origins of Westernized tribal jurisprudence. This book demonstrates how the Cherokee peopleโ€”prior to their removal on the Trail of Tearsโ€”used their judicial system as an external exemplar of American legal values, while simultaneously deploying it as a bulwark for tribal culture and tradition in the face of massive societal pressure and change. Extensive case studies document the Cherokee Nation’s exercise of both criminal and civil jurisdiction over American citizens, the roles of women and language in the Supreme Court, and how the courts were used to regulate the slave trade among the Cherokees. Although long-known for its historical value, the legal significance of the Cherokee Supreme Court has not been explored until now

Update in Adams v. Elfo [Nooksack Habeas Matter]

Here are the new materials in Adams v. Elfo (W.D. Wash.):

35 Magistrate Report

36 Objections

38 Tribe Response to Objections

39 Tribal Court Response to Objections

40 Reply

43 DCT Order

Nooksack tag here.

Amusement of the Day (concl.): BIA Phoenix Area Enrollment Manual

And today we conclude with a few leftover illustrations (I particularly like the one that illustrates Indian lawyering). Hope you enjoyed the previous posts here and here.

Amusement of the Day (cont.) โ€” 1977 BIA Phoenix Area Office Enrollment Manual Illustrations

Yesterday, we covered tribal constitutions. Today, the political and bureaucratic complexity of enrollment decisions in cartoon form (we will conclude tomorrow):

Amusement of the Day โ€” 1977 BIA Phoenix Area Office Enrollment Manual Illustrations

Apparently, in 1977 or so, the Phoenix Area Office decided to write a lengthy manual for tribal governments, instructing them on how to make enrollment decisions that met tribal constitutional muster. Suffice it to say the text is TL:DR, but the illustrations are awesome โ€” and by awesome, I mean crazy โ€” and by crazy, I mean Indian country crazy.

Tomorrow, how tribal governments make membership decisions….

Federal Court Dismisses Malicious Prosecution Suit against Blue Lake and Outside Counsel by Former Business Partner

Here are the materials in Acres Bonusing Inc v. Marston (N.D. Cal.):

1 Complaint

1-2 Tribal Court Opinion

29-1 Boutin Jones Defendants MTD

30-1 Boutin Jones Anti-SLAPP Motion

31 Janssen Malloy Defendants Anti-SLAPP Motion

32-1 Marston Defendants MTD

33 Janssen Malloy Defendants MTD

38 ABI Motion for Sanctions

40 JM Defendants Response to 38

43 ABI Response to BJ MTD

44 ABI Response to JM MTD

45 ABI Response to Marston MTD

46 ABI Reply in Support of Motion for Sanctions

47 JM Reply

48 BJ Reply

49 Marston Reply

50 ABI Response

50-1 Marston Anti-SLAPP Motion

52 Marston Response to ABI Motion to Strike

56 ABI Response to BJ Anti-SLAPP Motion

57 ABI Response to JM Anti-SLAPP Motion

58 ABI Response to Marston Anti-SLAPP Motion

59 JM Reply in Support of Anti-SLAPP Motion

60 BJ Reply in Support of Anti-SLAPP Motion

62 Marston Reply in Support of Anti-SLAPP Motion

65 DCT Order

Related cases here.

Federal Court Refuses to Dismiss Federal Indictment of Habitual D.V. Offender [Underlying Nooksack D.V. Convictions]

Here are the materials in United States v. Cline (W.D. Wash.):

1 Complaint

40 Motion to Dismiss

46 Response

47 Reply

50 Surreply

51 Sur-sur-reply

55 DCT Order