Cross-Motions in Penobscot Nation Suit over the Penobscot River

Here are the pleadings in Penobscot Nation v. Schneider (D. Me.):

116 State Intervenors Motion

117 Maine Motion

120 US Motion

121 Penobscot Nation Motion

137 Intervenors Response

138 Intervenors Motion to Exclude

139 Penobscot Response to NPDES Permittees

142 State Response

143 US Response

144 Penobscot Response

We posted the first amended complaint here.

United States Intervention Materials in Penobscot Nation v. Maine


2014-02-04 United States Complaint-in-Intervention

Exhibit A – to U.S. Complaint in Intervention

Exhibit B to US Complaint in Intervention

Exhibit C to US Complaint in Intervention


New State Motion in Penobscot Tribe & United States v. Mills (Maine)


2013-08-26 Defendant State_s Motion to Amend Answer and Counterclaim (3)

Affirmation in Support of State Defendant_s Motion to Amend Answer and Counterclaim (2)

Exhibit A – Amended Answer and Counterclaim (3)

Exhibit B – letters from Banks (3)

Exhibit C – 2012-05-24 Statement by Counsel (3)

Exhibit D 2013-07-11 Chief_s Correspondence to FERC (2)

US intervention materials here. Prior post here.

United States Intervenes in Penobscot Nation’s Fight with Maine

Here are the materials:

2013-08-16 United States Complaint in Intervention

2013-08-16 United States Motion to Intervene

2013-08-16 Affidavit in Support of Motion to Intervene

Exhibit A to Complaint 2012-08-12 Correspondence from Schneider

Exhibit B to Complaint 1988-02-16 Correspondence from Tierney

Exhibit C to Complaint 1997-05-30 State of Maine Response to Doi

Prior post here.

Penobscot Nation Sues Maine AG over Penobscot River Sustenance Fishing

Here is the complaint in Penobscot Nation v. Schneider (D. Me.):

Penobscot Complaint

From the complaint:

By letter dated February 16, 1988, then Attorney General for the State of Maine, James T. Tierney, issued an opinion to William J. Vail, then Commissioner of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife for the State of Maine, stating that salmon fishing by members of the Penobscot Nation for their individual sustenance “in the Penobscot River within the boundaries of the Penobscot Reservation . . . would clearly fall within the purview of” the right of the Nation’s members to engage in sustenance fishing, free from state authority by the terms of 30 M.R.S.A. § 6207(4), the provision quoted in paragraph 13, above, and ratified by Congress in the Settlement Act. (Emphasis added.)


By letter dated August 8, 2012, Defendant William J. Schneider issued an opinion to Defendants Chandler Woodcock and Joel T. Wilkinson, stating that the Penobscot River “is not part of the Penobscot Nation’s Reservation” and that “the State of Maine has exclusive regulatory jurisdiction over activities taking place on the River.”