Whistleblower Prevails in Suit against Cherokee Nation

Here are the materials in Comingdeer v. Cherokee Nation (Cherokee Dist. Ct.):

Complaint

Motion to Dismiss

Nation Motion to DQ Attorney Smith

Objection to Cherokee Nation s Motion to Deem Objection Confessed

Objection to Motion to Dismiss

Order Denying Motion to DQ Attorney Smith

Order Overruling Defendant s Motion to Dismiss and Ruling on Other Pending Motions

Reply in Support of Defendant s Motion to Dismiss

Jury Instructions

Final Judgment Under Advisement, Verdict Form 1, and Verdict Form 2

NYTs Profile on Cherokee Suit against Opioid Manufacturers and Distributors

Here is “In Opioid Battle, Cherokee Want Their Day in Tribal Court.”

 

Cherokee Nation Says Recent 10th Cir. Decision Supports Tribal Court Jurisdiction Over Drugmakers

Download(PDF) brief in the matter of McKesson Corp. et al. v. Hembree et al., 17-cv-00323 (D. Okla.):

Links: Previous posts, Murphy v. Royal (10th Cir. Aug. 8, 2017)

Cherokee Nation Briefs Asserting Tribal Court Jurisdiction Over Drug Makers

Here are the materials in the matter of McKesson Corp. et al. v. Hembree et al., 17-cv-00323 (D. Okla.):

Doc. 86 – Memorandum of Defendant Attorney General Todd Hembree in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Preliminary Injunction

Doc. 95 – Response of Judicial Officers to Motion for Preliminary Injunction

Complaint and motion previously posted here.

Tribal court complaint previously posted here.

Drug Companies Challenge Cherokee Tribal Court Jurisdiction in Federal Court

Here are the materials in McKesson Corp. v. Hembree (N.D. Okla.):

2 Complaint

13 Motion for Injunction

The tribal court complaint in Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma v. McKesson Corp. is here.

 

Cherokee Nation Sues Drug Makers in Tribal Court over Opioid Additional Epidemic

Here is the complaint in Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma v. McKesson Corp. (Cherokee Nation Dist. Ct.):

Petition 4-20-17

News coverage in WaPo: “Cherokee Nation sues drug firms, retailers for flooding communities with opioids.”

Cherokee Nation Allowed to Proceed with Avandia Suit against GlaxoSmithKline in Cherokee Courts

Here are the materials in GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Cherokee Nation (D. Mass.):

62 GlaxoSmithKline Motion

63 US Memorandum

65 Cherokee Nation Motion

68 GlaxoSmithKline Reply

70 Cherokee Nation Reply

79 DCT Order

An excerpt:

The dispute in this case centers on a 2012 settlement agreement entered into by Plaintiff GlaxoSmithKline LLC (“GlaxoSmithKline” or “GSK”) in connection with its plea in a  criminal proceeding, United States of America v. GlaxoSmithKline, LLC, Criminal Action  No. 12-10206-RWZ (D. Mass). GlaxoSmithKline now seeks a declaratory judgment that claims brought by the Cherokee Nation in the District Court of the Cherokee Nation were released by the settlement agreement. Presently at issue are GlaxoSmithKline’s Renewed Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment [#61] and the Cherokee Nation’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment [#64]. For the following reasons, GlaxoSmithKline’s motion is DENIED and the Cherokee Nation’s motion is ALLOWED.

We posted the complaint here.

 

GlaxoSmithKline v. Cherokee Nation — Suit over Cherokee Court Jurisdiction

Here is the complaint in GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Cherokee Nation (D. Mass.):

Complaint

An excerpt:

By filing suit in the Tribal Court for conduct relating to the marketing, sale and promotion of Avandia, the Cherokee Nation breached the Avandia Settlement Agreement in three ways. First, the Avandia Settlement Agreement clearly specifies that the exclusive jurisdiction and venue over disputes under the Avandia Settlement Agreement are vested in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Filing suit in the Tribal Court was a breach of this exclusive jurisdiction and venue provision. Second, the Cherokee Nation’s suit runs afoul of the Avandia Settlement Agreement because it asserts claims that were released under the Avandia Settlement Agreement. Third, the suit purports to seek relief under the “statutory, common, and decisional laws of the Cherokee Nation,” notwithstanding that disputes under the Settlement Agreement are “governed under the laws of the United States.”

Cherokee Nation Redistricting Challenge — Tribal Court Materials — UPDATED

Here are the materials in Anglen v. Cherokee Nation Council: