District of South Dakota – Page 12

All of the cards were stacked against the parents in these proceedings and the parents lost 100 percent of the time.

That’s right, you didn’t misread that. The state won 100 percent of the time, which isn’t surprising given that only the state was allowed to present any evidence and all of that evidence was submitted secretly to the judge. But two South Dakota Indian tribes — the Oglala Sioux Tribe and the Rosebud Sioux Tribe — and three Indian parents fought back.

Native American Telecom (Crow Creek Sioux) Contract Breach Claims against Sprint Allowed to Proceed

April 6, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here are the materials in Sprint Communications Company L.P. v. Crow Creek Sioux Tribal Court (D. S.D.):

182 Sprint Motion to Dismiss

190 Native American Telecom Opposition

196 Sprint Reply

234 DCT Order

We have posted on this case before:

on tribal court jurisdiction in 2010
on the denial of an injunction against Sprint in 2011
A related case against the tribal court again

South Dakota Tribes Win Federal ICWA Case, Oglala Sioux v. Van Hunnik

March 31, 2015December 15, 2015Kate Fort8 Comments

The 45 page order granting partial summary judgment is HERE, with a judgment order granting injunctive and declaratory relief forthcoming in May.

The court finds that Judge Davis, States Attorney Vargo, Secretary Valenti and Ms. Van Hunnick developed and implemented policies and procedures for the removal of Indian children from their parents’ custody in violation of the mandates of the Indian Child Welfare Act and in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

The case directly addressed section 1922 emergency removal standard of evidence and return of the child; and due process claims at those emergency hearings (48-hour hearing) of notice, the right of parents to present evidence, to cross-examine witnesses, attorney representation, and a decision based on evidence at that hearing.

Among many other things, the judge addresses both the old and new Guidelines (which specifically mentioned this case):

A simple examination of these administrative materials should have convinced the defendants that their policies and procedures were not in conformity with ICWA § 1922, the DOI Guidelines or the Guidelines promulgated by the South Dakota Unified Judicial System. Indian children, parents and tribes deserve better.

The order grants summary judgment on the ICWA violations AND the Due Process ones:

Judge Davis and the other defendants failed to protect Indian parents’ fundamental rights to a fair hearing by not allowing them to present evidence to contradict the State’s removal documents. The defendants failed by not allowing the parents to confront and cross-examine DSS witnesses. The defendants failed by using documents as a basis for the court’s decisions which were not provided to the parents and which were not received in evidence at the 48-hour hearings.

This is amazing–congratulations and many thanks to all involved. Especially to the families.

Previous coverage here. Summary judgment briefs and exhibits here.

Trust Breach Claims for Compensation re: Flooding of Cheyenne River Sioux Reservation Dismissed

March 19, 2015March 17, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in LeBeau v. United States (D. S.D.):

11 US Motion to Dismiss

14 Opposition

17 Reply

18 DCT Order

An excerpt:

Plaintiffs’ claims accrued decades ago and are therefore barred by the statute of limitations. As this court stated in 2013, it is sympathetic to the claims made by plaintiffs. But even sympathetic claims must comply with jurisdictional requirements. Because there is no valid waiver of sovereign immunity, this court has no jurisdiction to entertain this suit. Plaintiffs may deserve compensation, but that compensation must come from Congress.

Prior suit materials are here.

Sprint Communications Sues Oglala Sioux Tribe and Tribal Court over Utility Registration Fees

February 11, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here are the materials in Sprint Communications Co. LP v. Wynne (D. S.D.):

US Prevails in Wrongful Death Action/MedMal Brought against Indian Health Service

January 9, 2015January 9, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Archambault v. United States (D. S.D.):

32 US Motion for Summary J

41 Archambault Opposition

45 US Reply

49 DCT Order Granting Summary J to the US

An excerpt:

Plaintiff, in the briefs, has lodged many complaints against the Indian Health Service (“IHS”) and the failures of the United States to live up to treaty obligations. The court sympathizes with the plaintiff. The problems within HIS are well known, at least to those of us with significant contacts with “Indian Country.” I have often observed that Native Americans have been and are being unfairly treated by the United States, considering the failed promises these many years. This court, however, cannot micromanage the IHS or even a single clinic. I cannot dictate how many hours per day or week or month any federal health care provider should be required to be on duty. The court also realizes how very difficult it is for any health care agency to recruit and retain qualified health care providers, especially in rural isolated areas. Living conditions are often sub-standard, especially for highly educated workers. The climate is rather harsh. The ultimate solution is for Native Americans to obtain the necessary education and skills to return to serve their families and others. That process has already started and improvements have been made by dedicated health care providers. Much more remains to be accomplished.

Prior post on this case here.