Here is the complaint in Northern Arapaho Tribe v. Lacounte (D. Mont.):
District of Montana
Federal Court Holds Tribe and Council are Subject to Discover in FTCA Suit against US
Here are the materials in Matt v. United States (D. Mont.):
45 DCT Order Granting Motion to Quash
An excerpt:
Matt seeks documents in the possession of the Fort Belknap Community Council. (Doc. 26-1 at 2.) In order to satisfy Matt’s request, Council would be required to take affirmative action to produce tribal documents. (Doc. 37 at 3.) If the Court granted Matt’s request the judgment would “interfere with public administration” of the tribe and would “compel [the sovereign] to act.” Maxwell, 708 F.3d at 1087-90. The recovery sought in this case would operate against the tribe. Matt should not be allowed to “circumvent tribal immunity” by addressing the Subpoena Duces Tecum to Mark Azure instead of to the tribe.
An excerpt:
The Council entered into an ISDEAA contract for the maintenance of the roads on Matt’s property. The Council and its tribal members should be deemed part of the BIA and subject to the FTCA. The Council and its tribal members should be subject to discovery related to the construction and maintenance of the roads covered by the ISDEAA contract.
ICRA Habeas Claim against Fort Peck Dismissed on Exhaustion Grounds
Here are the materials in Lambert v. Fort Peck Assiniboine & Sioux Tribes (D. Mont.):
Tort Suit against Rocky Boys’ Business Committee Dismissed
Here are the materials in Eagleman v. Rocky Boys’ Chippewa-Cree Tribal Business Committee (D. Mont.):
16-3 Eagleman Trial Court Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
16-5 Eagleman Tribal Appellate Brief
Federal Court Quashes Third Party Subpoena of Fort Belkap Indian Community Officers and Docs
Here are the materials in Matt v. United States (D. Mont.):
37 Fort Belknap Motion to Quash
40-1 Opposition to Motio to Quash
45 DCT Order Granting Motion to Quash
The underlying complaint against the US is here:
ICRA Habeas Dismissed Because Tribal Prisoner Transferred to Federal Jail
Federal Court Refuses to Reconsider Tribal Court Exhaustion Order
Here are the materials in Glacier Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. Gervais (D. Mont.):
The original order is here.
Federal Court Dismisses Irrigation District’s Challenge to BIA Control of Flathead Irrigation Water
Here are the materials in Flathead Irrigation District v. Jewell (D. Mont.):
Crow Allottees Challenge to Crow Water Compact Dismissed on Federal Immunity Grounds
Here are the materials in Crow Allottees Association v. Bureau of Indian Affairs (D. Mont.):
Federal Court Dismisses Town of Browning v. Sharp, States Town Has Tribal Court Remedy
Here are the materials in Town of Browning v. Sharp (D. Mont.):
71 Sharp 12b1 Motion to Dismiss
73 Sharp 12b6 Motion to Dismiss
75 Sharp 12b7 Motion to Dismiss
115 Sharp Reply in Support of 75
An excerpt:
No adequate alternative forum exists to address the Town of Browning’s ex Parte Young action. The Blackfeet Tribal Court appears to represent an adequate alternative forum, however, to address the ongoing dispute between the Blackfeet Tribe and the Town of Browning. Indeed, in the Blackfeet Tribal Court, the Town of Browning can litigate against the Blackfeet Tribe directly rather than through an ex Parte Young action. Further, the Town of Browning appears to have moderated its position regarding the relief that it seeks. (Doc. 159). The Town of Browning appears to seek some reasonable compensation from the Blackfeet Tribe for use of the Town of Browning’s water main to deliver water to utility customers. The Town of Browning can seek and obtain this relief as a counterclaim in the breach of contract claim currently pending in the Blackfeet Tribal Court. Although the Town of Browning has challenged the Blackfeet Tribal Court’s jurisdiction over it on the grounds of sovereign immunity, the existence of a contract between the parties appears to confer jurisdiction on the Blackfeet Tribal Court. Montana v. United States, 450 U.S. 544, 565 (1981). An alternative forum exists for the Town of Browning to obtain the relief it seeks.
After weighing the factors listed in Rule 19(b), this Court has determined that this case should not proceed in the absence of the Blackfeet Tribe, a required party. The potential prejudice to the Blackfeet Tribe far outweighs the harm to the Town of Browning. The Blackfeet Tribal Court represents an alternative forum for the Town of Browning to address its underlying dispute with the Blackfeet Tribe.
Materials on the preliminary injunction stage of this litigation are here.
You must be logged in to post a comment.