Here is “In Opioid Battle, Cherokee Want Their Day in Tribal Court.”
tribal courts
Federal Court Dismisses Foreclosure Action against Tulalip Tribes & Tribal Member
Here are the materials in Wilmington Savings Fund Society v. Fryberg (W.D. Wash.):
Federal Court Denies Reconsideration and Grants Attorney Fees in Enerplus v. Wilkinson
Here are the new materials in Enerplus Resources (USA) Corporation v. Wilkinson (D.N.D.):
98 Enerplus Motion for Atty Fees
101 Response to Motion for Atty Fees
104 Reply in Support of Motion for Atty Fees
Prior posts here.
News Profile on Judge Abby Abinanti
From Rebecca Clarren of InvestigateWest, here is “NATIVE AMERICAN JUDGE SHOWS PEACEMAKING COURTS OFFER A MODEL FOR REFORM.”
Tribal Special Criminal Jurisdiction over Domestic Violence Statistics
Here:
The Following Tribes have implemented to date (as of last Friday):
1. Pascua Yaqui (51 investigations, 18 Convictions, 3 jury trials, 3 extradtions) *
2. Tulalip Tribes of WA. (23 cases, 14 Convictions) *
3. Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate (SD/ND) (7 cases, 4 Convictions) *
4. Confederated Tribes of Umatilla (OR)(10 Arrests, 10 Convictions) *
5. Assiniboine & Sioux Tribes of the Ft. Peck Reservation (MT) (16 Arrests) *
6. Little Traverse Bay Band of Odawa Indians (MI) (no arrests)
7. Alabama Coushatta Tribe of Texas (TX) (1 Arrest)
8. Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma (OK)(1 Arrest, 1 conviction)*
9. Seminole Nation of Oklahoma (OK)(No arrests)
10. Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians (NC)(25 Arrests 16 convictions) *
11. Sac and Fox Nation (KS)(No arrests) *
12. Kickapoo Tribe of Oklahoma (OK)(No arrests)
13. Nottawaseppi Huron Band of Potawatomi (MI) (No Arrests)
14. Muscogee Creek Nation (OK) (No arrests)
15. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe (ND) (1 Arrest) *
16. Sault St. Marie Tribe of Chippewa (MI) (4 arrests, 2 convictions, 1 Jury Trial)
17. Chitimacha Tribe of Louisiana (1 arrest)
18. Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe (No arrests)
* denotes DOJ TAP Tribe (NCIC Access)
Nationwide Statistics:
* 18 Implementing Tribes
* Over 138 Arrests
* 42 Convictions
* 36 Guilty pleas
* 8 federal referrals
* No federal Appeals
* 3 Jury acquittals
* 30 dismissals
Federal Court Denies Reconsideration Motion; Plaintiff “Nooksack Tribe” Still Lacks Standing
Here are the new materials in Nooksack Indian Tribe v. Zinke (W.D. Wash.):
45 Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration of Order Granting Motion to Dismiss
48 Plaintiff’s Reply in Support of Motion for Reconsideration of Order Granting Motion to Dismiss
Split Utah SCT Affirms Tribal Immunity, Adopts Tribal Court Exhaustion Doctrine
Here is the opinion in Harvey v. Ute Indian Tribe.
UPDATE (11/10/17) Briefs:
Appellee’s Brief-Ute Indian Tribe
Response to Supplemental Authority-Appellee 1
Response to Supplemental Authority-Appellee 2
Supplemental Authority-Appellant
An excerpt:
The oil and gas industry is a major economic force in the Uintah Basin. This industry relies, to some extent, on access to the Uintah and Ouray Reservation of the Ute Indian Tribe. The plaintiffs allege that, through its ability to restrict the industry’s access to tribal lands, the tribe has held hostage the economy of the non-Indian population.
Ryan Harvey, a plaintiff and part owner of the two corporations that are the other plaintiffs in this case, alleges that tribal officials from the Ute Tribe attempted to extort him by threatening to shut down his businesses if he did not acquiesce to their demands, despite the fact that his businesses do not operate directly on tribal land. After his refusal to make certain payments, the tribal officials sent a letter to the oil and gas companies operating on tribal land informing them that they would be subject to sanctions if they used any of Harvey’s businesses. The tribal official’s letter dried up a large portion of Harvey’s business, and Harvey brought claims against the tribe, the tribal officials, various companies owned by the tribal officials, oil and gas companies, and other private companies he alleges are complicit in this extortionate behavior. Most of the defendants filed motions to dismiss on various grounds and the district court dismissed Harvey’s claims against all of the defendants. On direct appeal, Harvey seeks to set aside the dismissals. We affirm the dismissal of the Ute Tribe under sovereign immunity and the dismissal of Newfield, LaRose Construction, and D. Ray C. Enterprises for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. But we vacate the dismissal of the remaining defendants and remand for further proceedings consistent with the tribal exhaustion doctrine.
If anyone has the briefs in this fascinating case, please send them along.
ABA Human Rights Journal: “Tribal Disenrollment Demands a Tribal Answer”
William R. Norman Jr., Kirke Kickingbird, and Adam P. Bailey have published “Tribal Disenrollment Demands a Tribal Answer” in the ABA Human Rights Journal.
MSU/ILPC Alums Whitney Gravelle & Bryan Newland Sworn in as Bay Mills Chief Judge and Chairman
Federal Court Rejects Effort to Enforce Settlement Agreement in Tribal Court
Here are the materials in Enerplus Resources (USA) Corporation v. Wilkinson (D.N.D.):
An excerpt:
Given the forum selection clauses in the Settlement Agreement, the ORRI Assignment, and the Division Orders, the Tribal Court clearly lacks jurisdiction over the case. The record before this Court clearly establishes that every party to the dispute agreed to the forum selection clauses at issue. Thus, Enerplus is entitled to a declaratory judgment that the forum selection clauses at issue preclude the Tribal Court from exercising jurisdiction over any dispute arising from those documents, and preclude Wilkinson from asserting in Tribal Court any claims arising from, and related to those documents.
CA8 materials here.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.