Here are the materials in San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water authority v. Jewell:
28 CDFW Motion and Amicus Brief
52 2016-04-15 SLDMWA-WWD opening & resp brief
57 2016-07-01 Hoopa reply brief
59 2016-07-01 Fed Ds’ reply-response brief
62 2016-07-01 PCFFA-IFR response brief
64 2016-07-01 Yurok third brief on cross-appeal
72 2016-07-29 water contractors’ cross-appeal reply brief
73 2016-07-29 water contractors’ reply to PCFFA
SLDMWA v. Jewell, 52 FS3d 1020 (EDCA 2014) 2013 FARs XMSJ dcn
Here are the briefs in Central New York Fair Business Assn. v. Jewell:
Lower court materials here.
Here is the complaint captioned California Valley Miwok Tribe v. Jewell (E.D. Cal.):
Download petition for a Writ of Certiorari here.
Questions presented:
Whether a treaty promise to pay reparations to a group of Native Americans in the form and amount that is “best adapted to the respected wants and conditions of” said group of Native Americans, and subsequent appropriation of funds by Congress to pay such reparations, create a fiduciary relationship between the United States and said group of Native Americans.
Whether the Administrative Procedures Act waives the United States’ immunity from suit for accounting claims regarding trust mismanagement that begun before the enactment of the Act.
Whether a set of Appropriations Acts by Congress that defer the accrual of trust mismanagement claims against the United States operates as a waiver of the United States’ immunity from suit.
Previous posts in re Flute v. U.S. here.
Here is the en banc petition in Two Shields v. United States (Fed. Cir.):
Panel materials here.
Here, filed in the Central District of California:
Here is the complaint in Northern Arapaho Tribe v. United States Department of the Interior (D. Mont.):
An excerpt:
This is an action for declaratory and injunctive relief and money damages brought against the United States Department of the Interior (“Department”); its Secretary; and Regional Director for the Bureau of Indian Affairs (“BIA”) for violations of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (“ISDEAA”) and regulations promulgated thereunder. The Northern Arapaho Tribe (“NAT” or “Tribe”) submitted to the BIA a contract proposal for judicial services and requested technical assistance, consultation and a waiver of any regulations that the BIA thought could prevent or impede approval. The BIA failed or refused to provide technical assistance, consultation, or the requested waiver and declined the proposal. These failures and the declination violate the ISDEAA and applicable regulations. The Tribe is entitled to declaratory and injunctive relief and damages, plus interest, pursuant to the ISDEAA.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.