Here is the complaint in Yakama Nation General Council v. Sheridan Vineyard (E.D Wash.):
Eastern District of Washington
Federal Court Dismisses Remaining Claims of Wapato Heritage in Colville Leasing Matter
Here are the materials in Grondal v. United States (E.D. Wash.):
275 Colville Motion to Dismiss
571 Colville Supplemental Brief re 275
572 Wapato Motion for Partial Summary J
588 Colville Reply in Support of 275
605 US Reply in Support of 570
Prior post here.
Yakama Nation Cert Petition in Dispute with Yakima County over Criminal Jurisdiction
Here is the petition in Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation v. Yakima County:
Question presented:
The United States reassumed Pub. L. 83-280 criminal jurisdiction over crimes involving Indians within the Yakama Reservation from the State of Washington pursuant to 25 U.S.C. § 1323, on April 19, 2016. Years later, federal officials re-interpreted the scope of that federal reassumption to allow the State of Washington to once again exercise criminal jurisdiction over Indians within the Yakama Reservation any time a non-Indian is involved in the crime.The question presented is:
Can the United States change the scope of its reassumption of Pub. L. 83-280 jurisdiction in Indian Country years after the reassumption became effective under 25 U.S.C. § 1323 without the Yakama Nation’s prior consent required by 25 U.S.C. § 1326?
Lower court materials here.
Update (3/4/21):
Update (3/16/21):
Ninth Circuit Briefs in Kalispel Tribe of Indians v. Dept. of the Interior
Federal Court Orders Eviction of Campers from Colville Allotment [. . . It’s a long story]
Here are the materials in Grondal v. Mill Bay Members Assn. (E.D. Wash.):
232-us-motion-for-ejectment.pdf
329 DCT Order re Appointment of Counsel
411 DCT Order re Representation of Indian Allottees
438-plaintiffs-response-to-232.pdf
439-plaintiffs-motion-for-summary-judgment.pdf
469-colville-response-to-439.pdf
483-reply-in-support-of-439.pdf
Related post here.
Ninth Circuit Briefs in Yakama Nation Reservation Boundaries Case
Here are the briefs in Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation v. Klickitat County :
Lower court materials here.
Ninth Circuit Decides Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation v. Yakima County
Here is the opinion. An excerpt:
This case presents the question whether the State of Washington may exercise criminal jurisdiction over members of the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation who commit crimes on reservation land. To answer that question, we must interpret a 2014 Washington State Proclamation that retroceded—that is, gave back—“in part,” civil and criminal jurisdiction over the Yakama Nation to the United States, but retained criminal jurisdiction over matters “involving non-Indian defendants and non-Indian victims.” If “and,” as used in that sentence, is conjunctive, then the State retained jurisdiction only over criminal cases in which no party—suspects or victims—is an Indian. If, by contrast, “and” is disjunctive and should be read as “or,” then the State retained jurisdiction if any party is a non-Indian. We conclude, based on the entire context of the Proclamation, that “and” is disjunctive and must be read as “or.” We therefore affirm the district court.
Kalispel Tribe Sues Manufacturers over PFAS
Here is the complaint in Kalispel Tribe v. 3M (E.D. Wash.):
Ninth Circuit Oral Argument Video in Yakama Nation v. Yakima County
Federal Court Orders Tribal Exhaustion in Contract Dispute with Colville
Here are the materials in Clements v. Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation (E.D. Wash.):
You must be logged in to post a comment.