State v. Bullplume — Mont. SCT Affirms Conviction for Blackfeet Reservation Murder

Here is the opinion.

Montana SCT Rules that Crow Tribe Chairman Can Serve also as State Law Justice of the Peace

Here is the very interesting opinion in In the Matter of Not Afraid: Montana SCT Decision in In re Not Afraid.

 

Blackfeet Tribe Amicus Brief in State Court Probate Jurisdiction Case

The case is captioned In re Estate of Big Spring (Mont. S. Ct.). Here is the brief: Blackfeet Amicus Brief.

An excerpt from the brief:

This case comes before this Court on the appeal of the Appellants from the decision of the Ninth Judicial District of Glacier County which ruled against a Motion to Dismiss by the Appellants based on the lack of subject matter jurisdiction over the estate of William Big Spring, II, an enrolled member of the Blackfeet Tribe, who, at the time of his death was a resident of the Blackfeet Reservation and whose estate consisted of both trust and fee land solely within the exterior boundaries of the Blackfeet Reservation. The District Court stated that there was concurrent jurisdiction over this property and that the District Court was therefore the proper forum for the probate of this Indian-owned fee land.

Appellants argue that the State District Court is without jurisdiction over the probates of resident enrolled members of the Blackfeet Tribe. Appellants further state that the probate of the trust land of such persons is vested in the Administrative Courts of the United States and that the probate of the fee land is vested, exclusively in the Blackfeet Tribal Court. That is also the view of the Blackfeet Tribe as seen in this Amicus Brief.

Montana Supreme Court Reverses Conviction of CSKT Member

Here are the materials in State v. James:

State v James Opinion

James Opening Brief

Montana Brief

James Reply Brief

Interesting double jeopardy case, in that Montana law recognizes tribal court convictions for state double jeopardy purposes.

Montana Supreme Court Finds Montana DEQ Violated Clean Water Act in Tongue River Case

Here are the materials in Northern Cheyenne Tribe v. Montana Dept. of Environmental Quality:

Northern Cheyenne Brief

Environmental Groups Revised Opening Brief

Montana DEQ Answer Brief

Fidelity Exploration Appellee Brief

Northern Cheyenne Reply Brief

Environmental Groups Reply Brief

Montana Supreme Court Opinion

Montana Supreme Court Decides State/Tribal Court Jurisdiction Case

The case is Morigeau v. Gorman and here are the materials:

Mont. SCT Opinion

Gorman Response Brief

Morigeau Reply Brief

Montana Supreme Court Decides ICWA Notice Case

The court held in In re J.J.L. that the trial court properly concluded that, in the adjudication of a child of a Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians who was not eligible for membership, ICWA does not apply.

Here are the materials:

In re J.J.L. Opinion

Appellant Brief — JJL

Appellee Brief — JJL

Montana Supreme Court Decides ICWA Expert Case

The Montana Supreme Court upheld the lower court’s acceptance of testimony from an ICWA expert proferred by the state.

Matter of T.W.F. opinion

Appellant Brief

Appellee Brief

Reply Brief

Lozeau v. GEICO — State Court Jurisdiction over Reservation Tort

The question here is whether the Montana Supreme Court would invoke the doctrine of equitable tolling to toll the state statute of limitations where the plaintiff had first filed her tort claim in CSKT tribal court, then filed in state court. The court said yes, reversing a trial court order dismissing the claim.

Lozeau Opinion

Lozeau Appellant Brief

Geico Appellee Brief

Lozeau Reply Brief

Montana Supreme Court Declines to Address Constitutional Challenges to ICWA

The case is In re M.B. You can located the court’s opinion and the two appellate briefs on the Montana Supreme Court’s website here and searching for docket number 08-0443.

The question involved the adoptive placement rules of ICWA, in relation to children who were members of a state recognized tribe, the Little Shell Tribe of Chippewa Indians. The losing potential adoptive family did not raise the constitutional challenges until the appeal.