Here is the complaint in Rosales v. United States (E.D. Cal.):
Eastern District of California
SCOTUS Denies Cert in Knighton v. Cedarville Rancheria
Federal Court Materials in Tribal Property Line Dispute
Here are the materials in Grindstone Indian Rancheria v. Olliff (E.D. Cal.):
15 Amended Answer + Counterclaim
16 Motion to Dismiss Counterclaim
21 DCT Order Dismissing Counterclaim
Federal Court Dismisses Big Sandy Rancheria’s Challenge to State Tax Laws
Here are the materials in Big Sandy Rancheria Enterprises v. Becerra (E.D. Cal.):
Knighton v. Cedarville Rancheria Cert Petition
Here:
Questions presented:
“[T]he inherent sovereign powers of an Indian tribe do not extend to the activities of nonmembers of the tribe.” Montana v. United States, 450 U.S. 544, 565 (1981). The Montana Court recognized two limited narrow exceptions to that rule. But the Court has never resolved the question of whether tribal courts may ever exercise civil tort jurisdiction over nonmembers. In Plains Commerce Bank v. Long Family Land & Cattle Co., 554 U.S. 316 (2008) and in Dollar General Corporation and Dolgencorp, LLC v. The Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, et. al. 136 S.Ct. 2159 (2016) the issue was brought before this Court, but unanswered. This case presents the issue of: Whether Indian tribal courts have jurisdiction to adjudicate civil tort claims against nonmembers?
Further this case presents the issue of: If the Indian tribal courts have jurisdiction to adjudicate civil tort claims over nonmembers, what is the prerequisite notice of any such authority, what is the prerequisite consent thereto by a nonmember, and what is the viable scope of such jurisdiction so as to satisfy the Due Process rights of a nonmember?
Lower court materials here.
UPDATE:
Ninth Circuit Briefs in Stand Up for California! v. Dept. of Interior [No. 18-16830]
Ninth Circuit Briefs in Club One Casino v. Dept. of Interior [Challenge to IRA Section 5]
Federal Court Dismisses California Tribes’ Card Rooms Exclusivity Complaint
Here are the materials in Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation v. Newsom (E.D. Cal.):
11-1 California Gaming Assn Motion to Intervene
11-5 Proposed Motion to Dismiss
21 Tribes Opposition to Motion to Intervene
22 State Opposition to Motion to Intervene
26 Tribe Opposition to State Motion to Dismiss
Prior post here.
Ninth Circuit Panel Grants Rehearing in Knighton v. Cedarville Rancheria
Maybe this is nothing, but this is a little bit WEIRD . . . in that the Ninth Circuit’s opinions webpage links to an order granting rehearing (here) but there was no response brief docketed AND there is nothing on the court’s docket sheet indicating the petition was granted.
Here is the petition BTW:
Knighton Petition for Rehearing
Panel materials here.
Federal Court Declines to Enjoin Secretarial Election at Calif. Valley Miwok
Here are the materials in Aranda v. Sweeney (E.D. Cal.):
You must be logged in to post a comment.