District of Oregon – Page 4

Plaintiff is an Oregon corporation authorized and licensed to do business within the State of Oregon. Defendants Richard L. Davis aka Richard Red Hawk Davis aka Red Hawk (“Davis”) and John Newkirk aka John Grey Eagle Newkirk (“Newkirk”) are residents of the State of Oregon. Defendant Confederated Tribes-Rogue-Table Rock & Associated tribes is a not-for-profit organization, organized and existing pursuant to the laws of the State of Oregon; this organization conducts business under the name of the “Latgawa Indian Tribe.” These organizations will hereafter be collectively referred to as the “Tribe”.

Defendant Davis claims membership in the Tribe. Defendant Newkirk also claims membership in the Tribe, and also claims to be a “Latgawa Tribal Judge.” The Tribe purports to have established the Latgawa Indian Tribal Justice Court in Central Point, Oregon. Continue reading →

Suit re: Tribal Police Tort Claim Dismissed

May 22, 2009Matthew L.M. Fletcher

The case is Wallulatum v. Warm Springs Confederated Tribes (D. Or.). Here are the materials:

Wallulatum DCT Order

Warm Springs Motion to Dismiss

United States v. Akeen — Illegal Sale of Eagle Feathers at Powwow

March 25, 2009Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the indictment in United States v. Akeen (us-v-akeen-complaint). This is for a sale of eagle feathers at a powwow in Oregon, allegedly violative of the Lacey Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

Thanks to J. for the tip (also reported in Indianz).

US v. Boise — Challenge to Confession Obtained by Tribal Police

October 17, 2008Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here’s an Indian Civil Rights Act-related case out of the District of Oregon involving a motion to suppress a statement obtained by tribal police to be used as evidence in federal court. The motion was denied.

boise-motion-to-suppress

us-response-to-boise-motion

boise-reply-brief

us-v-boise-dct-order-denying-motion-to-suppress

Yakama-Colville Dispute over Fishing Territories

August 20, 2008Matthew L.M. Fletcher

The federal district court held that the two tribes, which had disputed fishing rights over places along the Columbia River, had to share. aug-2008-dct-order

From the opinion:

The dispute is part of a longstanding case brought by the United States to define certain Indian tribes’ treaty rights to take fish at all usual and accustomed places along the Columbia River and its tributaries. Colville sought to intervene in the case on two occasions, once in 1989 and once in 1999, but its requests were denied. See United States v. Oregon, 29 F.3d 481 (9th Cir. 1994) (“Oregon I”). In 2002, instead of moving to intervene yet again, the Colville Wenatchi began fishing at Icicle Creek.

On August 18, 2003, I granted Yakama’s motion for injunctive relief, enjoining Colville and its constituent tribes from fishing at Icicle Creek and holding that Colville was precluded by res judicata from asserting the arguments it raised in opposition to Yakama’s motion. Colville appealed that holding, and the Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded the case “for trial on the merits.” United States v. State of Oregon, 470 F.3d 809, 818 (9th Cir. 2006) (“Oregon II”). Upon remand from the Ninth Circuit, the matter was tried to the court on May 6, 7 and 8, 2008. Upon conclusion of the trial, Yakama, Colville, the United States, and the State of Washington submitted post-trial briefing.

For the reasons stated below, I find the Wenatchi and Yakama have joint fishing rights to fish at the Wenatshapam Fishery, which is located at the confluence of the Wenatchee River and Icicle Creek. Due to the alteration of this site by white settlement, and the fact that the evidence demonstrates fishing on Icicle Creek, in addition to fishing on the Wenatchee River, the nearest location for the Wenatshapam Fishery is the Leavenworth National Fish Hatchery on Icicle Creek.