D.C. Circuit – Page 12

United States Recommends Certiorari Grant in Menominee Tribe v. United States

June 2, 2015June 2, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here is the government’s brief:

An excerpt:

The court of appeals correctly held that neither the Tribe’s erroneous prediction of the outcome of litigation, nor its expectation that the government would deny its administrative claims, warrants equitable tolling of the CDA’s six-year limitations period. That decision, however, squarely conflicts with the Federal Circuit’s decision in Arctic Slope Native Ass’n v. Sebelius, 699 F .3d 1289 (2012), which found tolling appropriate on materially similar facts. In the government’s view, certiorari is warranted.

Cert petition is here.

Lower court materials here.

D.C. Circuit Briefs in Effort to Recover Litigation Expenses from Cobell Settlement Fund

May 8, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here:

1 Opening Brief

2 Appellee Brief

3 Reply Brief

4 Indian Land Tenure Foundation Amicus Brief

Lower court materials here.

D.C. Circuit Rejects Bid by Buena Vista Rancheria to Intervene in Challenge to Trust Acquisition

December 2, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here is the opinion in Amador County v. Dept. of Interior.

An excerpt:

In 2005, Amador County, California brought suit against the Department of Interior challenging the Secretary’s approval of a gaming compact between the Buena Vista Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians (the “Tribe”) and the State of California. After nearly six-and-a-half years of litigation, the Tribe sought to intervene for the limited purpose of moving to dismiss the amended complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19. The district court denied the motion as untimely, and this appeal followed. Because we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion, we affirm.

Briefs and lower court materials here.

Menominee Tribe v. United States Cert Petition

November 7, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher3 Comments

Here:

Menominee Indian Tribe Cert Petition

Question presented:

Whether the D.C. Circuit misapplied this Court’s Holland decision when it ruled – in direct conflict with a holding of the Federal Circuit on materially similar facts – that the Tribe did not face an “extraordinary circumstance” warranting equitable tolling of the statute of limitations for filing of Indian Self-Determination Act claims under the Contract Disputes Act?

Lower court materials here.

D.C. Circuit Rules against Menominee Tribe in Equitable Tolling Appeal

September 2, 2014September 2, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here is the opinion in Menominee Tribe v. United States.

An excerpt:

Delays caused by a party’s inauspicious legal judgments are not “extraordinary circumstance[s]” sufficient to justify equitable tolling. Faced with a variety of reasonable litigation options, the Menominee Tribe chose to wait and see if more favorable law would appear. In so doing, the Tribe allowed its claims to expire. Because we find that no obstacle stood in the Menominee Tribe’s way of bringing the claims within the limitations period, the judgment of the district court is affirmed.

Briefs and lower court materials here.

D.C. Circuit Rules against Menominee Tribe in Equitable Tolling Appeal

September 2, 2014September 2, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion in Menominee Tribe v. United States.

An excerpt:

Delays caused by a party’s inauspicious legal judgments are not “extraordinary circumstance[s]” sufficient to justify equitable tolling. Faced with a variety of reasonable litigation options, the Menominee Tribe chose to wait and see if more favorable law would appear. In so doing, the Tribe allowed its claims to expire. Because we find that no obstacle stood in the Menominee Tribe’s way of bringing the claims within the limitations period, the judgment of the district court is affirmed.

Briefs and lower court materials here.

Federal Court Issues Stay Pending Appeal in Alaska Fee to Trust Case

June 27, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the updated materials in Akiachak Native Community v. Jewell (D.D.C.):

139 Alaska Motion for Stay

140 Akiachak Opposition

143 Alaska Reply

145 DCT Order

An excerpt:

For the foregoing reasons, the Court will GRANT IN PART Alaska’s motion for an injunction by enjoining the Secretary from taking any land into trust in Alaska, pending the outcome of the appeal. The Court’s ruling does not apply to the pre-existing exception for the Metlakatla Indian Community of the Annette Island Reserve or its members. 25 C.F.R. § 151.1; see also 79 Fed.Reg. 24,648, 24,649.

Materials on the merits here. Materials on the motion for reconsideration here.