Gilmore v. Salazar: Effort by Indian Trust Land Owner to Force Federal Environmental Jurisdiction Fails

Here is the opinion in Gilmore v. Salazar (N.D. Okla.): Gilmore v. Salazar.

An excerpt:

Plaintiffs James E. Gilmore, Tammy S. Gilmore Springer, and Joanna K. Stand are members of the Quapaw Tribe of Oklahoma (the Tribe) and have an undivided percentage interest in the Sooner and/or Ottawa Chat Piles (the Chat Piles) located in northeastern Oklahoma. Chat was created as a byproduct of the mining process. Mining companies removed ore from the ground and stripped any valuable metals from the ore, and the remainder, chat, was stored on the surface in the form of chat piles. See Quapaw Tribe of Oklahoma v. Blue Tee Corp., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51476, 2008 WL 2704482, *1 (N.D. Okla. July 7, 2008). Plaintiffs allege that the Chat Piles are subject to regulation by the United States government, because the Chat Piles are located, in whole or in part, on restricted Tribal land and the property is held in trust for the benefit of Tribal members. Dkt. # 2, at 4-5. However, the Estate of Joseph E. Mountford (the Estate) claims to hold title to approximately two-thirds of the Sooner Chat Pile, and Bingham Sand & Gravel Company, Inc. (Bingham) claims that it has title to at least three-fourths of the Ottawa Chat Pile. Id. at 5. The interests held by the Estate and Bingham are considered fee, or non-Indian, interests in the Chat Piles.

Oklahoma Not Indispensable Party in Quapaw Environmental Suit against Polluters

Here is the most recent update in Quapaw Tribe v. Blue Tee (N.D. Okla.):

Quapaw v. Blue Tee Order re Rule 19 Motion

Blue Tee Rule 19 Motion

Quapaw Response

Blue Tee Reply

Update on Cherokee Freedmen Case in D.C. District Court

According to Marilyn Vann, the Cherokee Nation has filed a motion either to dismiss the Cherokee Nation v. Nash case, or transfer it back to the Northern District of Oklahoma:

CNO Motion

Exhibit 1

Cherokee Nation Suit against Freedmen Transferred to D.C. District Court

Here is that order: 2010-07-02 Order transferring Oklahoma case to DC

Muscogee Tax Dispute Remanded to State Court

Here is the opinion in Oklahoma ex rel. Edmundson v. Larkin (N.D. Okla.): DCT Order Remanding to State Court

Federal Court Rejects Quapaw Tribe’s Parens Patriae Claims

Here is the most recent opinion in Quapaw Tribe v. Blue Tee Corp. (N.D. Okla.) (Quapaw v Blue Tee DCT Order), where the court rejects most of the claims of the Tribe on grounds that it does not have standing to pursue land claims on behalf of individual tribal citizens. An earlier opinion dismissing the Tribe’s related claims against the United States is here.

Federal Court Denies Injunction in Muscogee Cigarette Seizure Case

Thanks to Mike for this. Here’s a news article on this case.

A federal court dismissed a request for an injunction against the Oklahoma Tax Commission for seizing tobacco products owned by the Muscogee (Creek) Nation. State law enforcement had seized the smokes on some pretty spurious grounds, pulling the trucks over for “weaving” and “following too close” (not texting!?!). The court rejected most of the Commission’s defenses, including standing and sovereign immunity, but dismissed the claim on the basis that Indian tribes are not “persons” that can sue under Section 1983, per Inyo County.

Sounds to us like a Section 1983 legislative “fix” is in order, too, like all the other problems created by the Supreme Court in the last decade.

Muscogee Injunction DCT Order

More later.

Tyson Chicken Successfully Asserts Cherokee Treaty Rights in Environmental Defense

As we reported last fall here, poultry producers including Tyson Chicken asserted that many of the State of Oklahoma’s efforts to enforce state environmental laws against them must fail because the waterways at issue are owned at least in part by the Cherokee Nation. The Northern District of Oklahoma substantially agreed.

Here is the opinion (thanks to M.M.) — Tyson Opinion and Order

Fletcher v U.S. — Suit re: Osage Headright Trust Funds Continues on Remand

The United States moved to dismiss the claim, largely on Rule 19 grounds, but the Northern District of Oklahoma denied the motion.

fletcher-dct-order

government-motion-to-dismiss

fletcher-opposition-to-government-motion

government-reply-brief

A recently filed motion from the plaintiffs for partial summary judgment is lurking — fletcher-motion-for-partial-summary-judgment

District Court Refuses to Dismiss ERISA Claim against Tribal Business

Here are the materials in Vandever v. Osage Nation Enterprises, out of the Northern District of Oklahoma. The court rejected a magistrate report and recommendation to dismiss an ERISA claim against ONE and the Osage Nation, and also rejected a request by the Nation to require the plaintiff to exhaust tribal court remedies.

dct-order-rejecting-magistrate-report

vandever-magistrate-report

Continue reading