District of Arizona

Quechan Tribe Claim re: Indian Hospital Services Fails

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the opinion: Quechan v US — IHS Claim

An excerpt:

This is an action brought by the Quechan Indian Tribe against the United States seeking a declaration that the United States has a duty to operate its medical facilities and practices at a level that meets or exceeds a minimum generally accepted standard of care, and that the United States has breached that duty. Plaintiff also seeks equitable relief requiring defendants to ensure its medical services at the Fort Yuma Indian Reservation do not fall below the minimum standard of care.

Third Consecutive Sentencing Decision from Arizona Federal Courts — Alvarez v. Tracey

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials:

R&R 12-13-10

Order Unsealing R&R 12-20-10

Order on Motion for Partial SJ 03-31-11

An excerpt:

The Court concludes that, for purposes of § 1302(7), two charges are differentoffenses if each “requires proof of a fact which the other does not,” regardless of whetherthey arise from the same transaction. See Blockburger, 284 U.S. at 304. Applying thisdefinition to Petitioner’s case, § 1302(7) has not been violated by his convictions andpunishment. Petitioner’s own description suggests that each offense required proof of a factthat the others did not. The Court will accept the R&R and deny Petitioner’s motion forpartial summary judgment.

Gila River v. United States — Federal Court Affirms Interior Decision to Take Land Into Trust for Tohono O’odham Nation

Matthew L.M. Fletcher4 Comments

Here is the opinion, via Indianz.

Here are the key materials:

Glendale Motion for Summary J

GRIC Motion for Summary J

TON Motion for Summary J

USA Motion for Summary J in Gila River v US

 

 

US Must Defend under Federal Tort Claim Act Tribal Police Officer Torts

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion in Garcia v. United States (D. Ariz.): Garcia v US

The court rejected the government’s motion for summary judgment, on grounds that the Navajo police officer (who struck a killed the plaintiff while driving under the influence) was working in the scope of work of a 638 contract.

 

Federal Court Claim re: Hopi Secretarial Election Stayed under Tribal Court Exhaustion Doctrine

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Sekayumptewa v. Salazar (D. Ariz.):

Sekayumptewa Motion for Prelimary Injunction

Hopi Motion to Dismiss

DCT Order Dismissing Hopi Defendants & Denying PI Motion

Tohono O’odham Nation Amicus Brief in Challenge to Arizona Immigration Law SB1070

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here: TON Amicus Brief in Friendly House Case

The complaint in the case, Friendly House v. Whiting (D. Ariz.) is here.

Salt River Project Federal Challenge to Navajo Labor Relations Board Dismissed

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here are the materials in Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District v. Lee (D. Ariz.):

DCT Order Dismissing Claim

Navajo Exhaustion Motion to Dismiss

Navajo Rule 19 Motion to Dismiss

Salt River Motion for Summary Judgment

This case is on remand from the Ninth Circuit — and that order is here.

 

A Quick Note on Politics, Indian Gaming Lands Litigation, and Permissive Intervention

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

In the Gila River Indian Community v. United States litigation over proposed gaming lands benefiting the Tohono O’odham Nation, there have been numerous efforts by Arizona state politicians to intervene in the suit. No party seems to want them there, and they don’t seem to be adding a whole lot to the suit in terms of substance, and the court largely had refused to let individual politicians in the case — at first. Here are the first two orders, denying two such requests:

DCT Order Denying Sen Pearce Motion to Intervene

DCT Order Denying Scott Bundgaard Motion to Intervene

On November 19, however, Judge Campbell permitted the intervention of “Legislative Leaders” of the Arizona Legislature. Here is that order: DCT Order Permitting Intervention of Ariz Legislators.

Why?

Continue reading →

Quechan Tribe v. United States — Demand for Reservation Health Care

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the complaint: Quechan Complaint.

An excerpt:

Plaintiff Quechan Indian Tribe (“Tribe”), in its own capacity and as parens patriae on behalf of its members, seeks a declaratory judgment that the United States of America, acting through the Department of Health and Human Services, Indian Health Service (“IHS“), and the IHS Fort Yuma Service Unit (“United States”) is in breach of its statutory obligation and special trust responsibility to provide the Tribe and its members within the Fort Yuma Indian Reservation (“Reservation”) with health care facilities and services that meet generally accepted, appropriate, and best available standards of care.

Arizona State Senator Denied Leave to Intervene in Challenge to Tohono O’odham Fee to Trust Case

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is that order (the Senator is Russell Pearce): DCT Order Denying Sen Pearce Motion to Intervene