Here is the opinion in People ex rel. Beccera v. Huber:
California COA Allows Most State Law Claims against Indian Smokeshop under PL 280
Here is the opinion in People ex rel. Beccera v. Huber:
California Court of Appeals — First District
California Appellate Court Affirms Dismissal of Silvia Burley Suit against California Gambling Control Commission under Anti-SLAPP Rule
Here is the unpublished opinion in California Miwok Tribe v. Everone:
California COA Vacates RLUIPA Judgment Favoring Indian Prisoner
Here is the opinion:
Calif. COA Decides Scope of Tribal Immunity Waiver Matter
Here is the unpublished opinion in Federal Indians of Graton Rancheria v. Kenwood Investments (Cal. Ct. App. — First Dist.):
Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria v. Kenwood Investments
An excerpt:
The trial court’s ruling that the Tribe waived sovereign immunity with respect to Amendment No. 2 is affirmed. We reverse the award of attorney fees. All other aspects of the judgment remain undisturbed.
Unpublished ICWA Notice Case out of California Detailing Mistakes in Notices
If you see me present in the next year, be warned that at the first question about notice and how long it takes for a tribe to respond, I may just read this opinion out loud. As a reminder, there is a list names and addresses in the Federal Register of Designated Tribal Agents for Service of ICWA Notice for agencies to send notice to when a parent says they are or may be a member of a tribe. The First Circuit does a very nice job of detailing the type of mistakes that are just incredibly common. A note–the Court uses the Federal Register list that was in effect when the notices supposedly went out in 2015. However, a few times the Agency managed to use agents listed in the most recent (March, 2016) register.
According to the Federal Register, the designated agent and address for the Jicarilla Apache Nation was “Olivia Nelson-Lucero, Acting Program Manager, Jicarilla Behavioral Health, P.O. Box 546, Dulce, NM 87528.” (79 Fed. Reg. 72027.)
According to the certified mailing receipt, the Agency sent the notice to the designated address, but directed it to “Director, Mental Health/Social Services” rather than to “Olivia Nelson-Lucero, Acting Program Manager, Jicarilla Behavioral Health.”
Current designated agent: Jicarilla Apache Nation, Sharnen Velarde, ICWA Social Worker, P.O. Box 546, Dulce, NM 87528
The designated agent and address for the Tonto Apache Tribe was “Brian Echols, Social Services Director, T.A.R. #30, Payson, AZ 85541.” (79 Fed. Reg. 72029.) The Agency sent the notice to the designated address, but directed it to “Lyndsie Butler, Social Services Director” rather than to “Brian Echols, Social Services Director.”
Agency used current agent, 81 Fed. Reg. 10909
The designated agent and address for the White Mountain Apache Tribe was “Cora Hinton, ICWA Representative/CPS Supervisor, P.O. Box 1870, Whiteriver, AZ 85941.” (79 Fed. Reg. 72029.) The Agency sent notice to the designated address, but to “Mariella Dosela, ICWA Representative” rather than to “Cora Hinton, ICWA Representative/CPS Supervisor.”
Agency used current agent, 81 Fed. Reg. 10909
The designated agent and address for the Yavapai Apache Nation was “Linda Fry, Director, Department of Social Services, 2400 West Datsi Street, Camp Verde, AZ 11 86322.” (79 Fed. Reg. 72029.) The Agency sent notice to the designated address, but omitted Linda Fry’s name and title. In other words, it simply sent the notice to the tribe, rather to any particular person at the tribe.
Current designated agent: Ray DiQuarto, Social Services Director, 2400 West Datsi Street, Camp Verde, AZ 86322
The designated agent and address for the Crow Tribe of the Crow Reservation of Montana was “Melveen Paula Fisher, ICWA Coordinator, P.O. Box 340, Crow Agency, MT 59022.” (79 Fed. Reg. 72026.) The Agency sent notice to the “ICWA Representative” rather than to Fisher as “ICWA Coordinator.” Moreover, the notice was not sent to the address designated in the Federal Register; it was sent to P.O. Box 159 rather than to P.O. Box 340.
Agent is the same in both Registers.
The designated agent and address for the Lower Sioux was “Reanna Jacobs, ICWA Advocate, Darin Prescott, Director, 39568 Reservation Highway 1, Morton, MN 56270.” (79 Fed. Reg. 72021.) The Agency sent notice to “ICWA Representative” rather than to “Reanna Jacobs, ICWA Advocate, Darin Prescott, Director.” Moreover, the notice was not sent to the address designated in the Federal Register
Agent is the same in both Registers.
The designated agent and address for the Oglala Sioux Tribe was “Juanita Sherick, Director ONTRAC, P.O. Box 2080, Pine Ridge, SD 57752.” (79 Fed. Reg. 72020.) Although the Agency sent notice to the designated address, it directed it to the “ICWA Administrator” rather than to “Juanita Sherick, Director ONTRAC.” While sending notice to an ICWA Administrator may well be sufficient in some instances, the record in this case does not explain why it would be sufficient when the designated agent is someone who is instead the Director of “ONTRAC.”
Current designated agent is Emily Iron Cloud-Koenen, ICWA Administrator, Oglala Sioux Tribe—ONTRAC, P.O. Box 2080, Pine Ridge, SD 57770
The designated agent and address for the Santee Sioux Nation was “Clarissa LaPlante, ICWA Specialist, Dakota Tiwahe Service Unit, Route 2, Box 5191, Niobrara, NE 68760.” (79 Fed. Reg. 72020.) The Agency sent notice to the designated address, but directed it to the “ICWA Specialist” rather than to “Clarissa LaPlante, ICWA Specialist.”
Current designated agent is Carla Cheney, ICWA Specialist, Santee Sioux Tribe of Nebraska, Dakota Tiwahe Social Services Program, Route 2, Box 5191, Niobrara, NE
The designated agent and address for the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe was “Terrance Yellow Fat, Director, Indian Child Welfare Program, P.O. Box 770, Fort Yates, ND 58538.” (79 Fed. Reg. 72020.) According to the certified mail receipt and return receipt, the Agency sent notice to the designated address, but directed it to “Raquel Franklin” rather than to “Terrance Yellow Fat, Director.”
Agency used current agent, 81 Fed. Reg. 10900.
The designated agent and address for the Hannahville Indian Community of Michigan was “Jessica Brock, ICWA Worker, N15019 Hannahville B1 Road, Wilson, MI 49896.” (79 Fed. Reg. 72021.) The Agency sent notice to the designated address, but directed it to “ICWA Worker” rather than to “Jessica Brock, ICWA Worker.”
Agent is the same in both Registers.
The designated agent and address of the Prairie Island Indian Community was “Nancy Anderson, Family Service Manager, 5636 Sturgeon Lake Road, Welch, MN 55089.” (79 Fed. Reg. 72021.) The Agency sent notice to the designated address, but directed it to “ICWA Representative” rather than to “Nancy Anderson, Family Service Manager.” The record does not disclose why the notice would ensure that it would be delivered to the appropriate person
Current designated Agent is Renae Wallace, Family Service Manager, 5636 Sturgeon Lake Road, Welch, MN 55089;
The designated agent and address for the Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate tribe was “Evelyn Pilcher, ICWA Specialist, P.O. Box 509 Agency Village, SD 57262.” (79 Fed. Reg. 72020.) The Agency sent notice to the designated address, but directed it to “ICWA Director” rather than Pilcher as “ICWA Specialist,” and added “Lake/Traver” to the name of the tribe.
Agent is the same in both Registers.
At least the Agency didn’t send notice to a tribal newspaper (100% true story).
California Appellate Court Finds Waiver of Tribal Immunity in Dispute over Authority of Council to Waive Immunity
Here is the opinion in Findleton v. Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians (Cal. Ct. App.).
An excerpt:
This appeal requires us to determine whether a Native American tribe known as the Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians (the Tribe) validly waived its sovereign immunity for purposes of the enforcement by construction contractor Robert Findleton (Findleton) of arbitration provisions in contracts between them. Findleton claims the Tribe waived its sovereign immunity when its Tribal Council entered into, and then amended, contracts with Findleton containing arbitration clauses and also adopted a resolution expressly waiving sovereign immunity to allow arbitration of disputes under the contracts. The Tribe disagrees, arguing the Tribal Council lacked authority to waive the Tribe’s immunity and therefore any such waivers were invalid, because the power to waive the Tribe’s immunity had not been properly delegated to the Tribal Council in accordance with the procedures specified by the Tribe’s constitution. The superior court agreed with the Tribe and held that it lacked jurisdiction over Findleton’s claims because there had been no valid waiver of the Tribe’s sovereign immunity. Findleton appealed.
Briefs in Findleton v. Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians (Immunity Waiver Dispute)
Three Recent California ICWA Cases
Reported case on notice, where the social service agency attempted to fix the notice issues while the case was on appeal. Fourth District remanded for proper notice.
An unreported case where the trial court refused to apply ICWA because of a lack of written communication from the tribe, though the agency received verbal confirmation of the children’s membership. The case was reversed, also by the Fourth District.
Finally, an unreported case using the “family lore” argument to find there was no notice necessary. Haven’t seen a family lore case in California since 2011. Those cases were all out of the Second District, while this one is out of the First.
Unreported ICWA Placement Preference Case out of California
Here.
Very difficult case with extensive testimony. Child was ultimately placed with distant cousins instead of grandparents with a history with the department. The court found good cause to deviate from the tribe’s preferences of matrilineal relatives.
Because there is so much testimony in this opinion, it gives a window into the way the lower courts are making these decisions, and how the court understands how children connect to their tribal communities:
[Foster parent] already encouraged [three year old child] to look at Chickasaw language flashcards and language applications, to make beaded necklaces, and to hunt, fish, and pick berries.
The Department’s report recommending good cause to deviate from placement preferences included this very frustrating statement:
It is unfortunate that that [sic] tribe is so distant and has not had the opportunity to meet Autumn and the people she considers to be parents. If they had, they may decide that it is in actuality in their tribe’s best interest to avoid placement disruption and the possibility of creating an attachment disorder in this young child who currently has such a bright future.
Stop the Casino 101 Coalition v. Brown Cert Petition
Here:
Questions presented:
1. Does the federal government have the unilateral power to alter California’s historic territorial jurisdiction and transfer that jurisdiction to an Indian tribe?
2. If the answer to the first question is affirmative, should a federal statute restoring tribal recognition and authorizing the United States to accept fee title to unspecified private lands within California’s borders be construed as transferring territorial jurisdiction from the state to the tribe when the statutory language is silent on that subject?
3. Can a state’s territorial jurisdiction shift by implication, or is an express, unequivocal acceptance of jurisdiction required under 40 U.S.C. § 3112?
Lower court materials here.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.