Briefs in Star Tickets v. Chumash Casino Resort

Materials and documents for the leave to appeal in Michigan’s Supreme Court:

Defendant/Appellant’s Application for Leave to Appeal

Plaintiff-Appellee’s Brief in Opposition to Application for Leave to Appeal

Defendant/Appellant’s Brief In Reply To Opposition

Amicus brief in support of petition from State Bar’s American Indian Law Section

Our motion for leave to file and our lodged amicus brief in support of petition

Ak-Chin seeking Attorney Contractor for Law & Order Committee

Here:

RFP APPROVED 2015-12-22

ICWA Case out of Idaho Supreme Court

Here.

In this case, the trial court ordered the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes to pay half of the cost of the child’s attorneys fees, sanctioned the Tribes for not turning over membership information in response to the adoptive couple’s motion to compel, barred the Tribes from presenting information on the child’s status as an Indian child, barred the Tribes from enrolling the child, and granted attorney’s fees request from the adoptive couple.

In 2015.

On August 12, 2015, the trial court granted the Does $863 in costs and $35,000 in attorney fees against the Tribes, and further granted Child’s counsel $6,056.25 in fees against the Tribes. The Tribes initially challenged the lower court’s discovery and sanction rulings, as well as its ultimate grant of petition for adoption and attorney fees. The Does cross-appealed, challenging the Tribes’ intervention in the matter. The Tribes have since dropped their challenge to the adoption and the Does correspondingly dropped their challenge to the Tribes’ intervention. What remains now is the Tribes’ assertion that the lower court’s discovery rulings, injunction, sanctions, grant of fees, and failure to find Child an Indian child were in error. The Does request attorney fees on appeal pursuant to Idaho Appellate Rule 11.2(a) and Idaho Code section 12–121.

All of these were ultimately overturned by the Idaho Supreme Court in the decision.

Navajo Nation’s Motion for Summary Judgment in Voting Rights Matter

Here is the pleading in Navajo Nation v. San Juan County (D. Utah):

298 NN Motion for Summary J

Prior posts here and here.

King Mountain Tobacco Seeks Immunity from New York Law

Here is the pleading in State of New York v. King Mountain Tobacco Co. (E.D. N.Y.):

Kings
Not a product of King Mountain….

195-1 King Mountain Motion for Summary J

 

Galanda, Shared Faith: Tribal State Indian Religious Rights Reform

Link to article in the King County Bar Bulletin here.

Federal Court Rejects Jurisdiction over Lower Brule Sioux Tribe Internal Disputes

Here are the materials in Wright v. Langdeau (D.S.D.):

12 Motion for TRO

15 Langdeau Motion to Dismiss

15-4 Tribal Court Order

19 US Motion to Dismiss

20 DCT Order

Opening Merits Brief in U.S. v. Bryant

Here:

Brief for the United States

2016 Indian Entities Recognized and Eligible To Receive Services From the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs

Here is the notice from the Federal Register:

2016 Federal Register List of Entities Eligible

Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe v. Blue Cross Blue Shield Complaint

Here:

Complaint