Oklahoma Supreme Court

Okla. SCT Holds Adoption without Consent is Not Termination of Parental Rights under ICWA

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the opinion in In re G.D.J.

An excerpt:

¶36 Section 1912 of the ICWA requires the use of a “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard of proof, for certain purposes, in a proceeding to terminate parental rights. As discussed above, our statutes prohibit a trial court from taking any action that results in a termination of the parent-child relationship in a proceeding to determine a minor child eligible for adoption without the consent of a natural parent. Therefore, a “clear and convincing” standard of proof is all that is necessary in such a proceeding. The higher standard of proof is relevant to the specific determination, the continued custody of the child by the parent or Indian custodian, is likely to result in serious emotional or physical damage to the child. The hearing on the petition for adoption, which has not occurred in the present case, will be a proceeding which may result in the termination of a parent-child relationship, and is the only proceeding in which the court may grant a final decree of adoption. At the hearing on the petition for adoption, evidence relevant to matters included in subsection (f) of Section 1912 must be proven “beyond a reasonable doubt” in order to support a determination that parental rights should be terminated, including the testimony of an expert witness. Continue reading →

Opening Brief in Okla. SCT Case — 1st to Address Federal Injunction against State Court Assertion of Jurisdiction over Tribal Casinos

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opening brief in Sheffer v. Buffalo Run Casino:

Sheffer Opening Brief.

 

State Supreme Court Outcomes: Oklahoma

Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

And now to a big target, Oklahoma. Oklahoma’s highest court for civil cases is the Oklahoma Supreme Court, and for criminal cases is the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals.

In Oklahoma, tribal interests have a 43 percent success rate.

Here are the cases:

Continue reading →

Oklahoma Sup. Ct. Decides Land Title Dispute involving Non-Recognized Tribe

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the short opinion in Perme v. Southern Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma.

An exceprt:

In August 2000, Dynamic Gaming Solutions, Inc. (Dynamic), entered into an agreement with Gary Ridge, who represented himself as the Chief of the Southern Cherokee Nation. Pursuant to said agreement, Dynamic agreed to purchase two pieces of property in Webber Falls, Oklahoma, for the purpose of constructing a casino. Such casino operation was represented to be legally possible, according to Mr. Ridge, because the Southern Cherokee were a legitimate Indian tribe and, therefore, were a sovereign nation able to construct and operate a gaming business. Mr. Perme, who was a principal in Dynamic, agreed, as part of such transaction, to purchase eighty (80) acres for the benefit of Mr. Ridge and his tribe. The subject eighty (80) acres was deeded on August 28, 2000, by Richard A. Hayes and his wife, Margaret A. Hayes, to “The United States of America to be held in trust for the Southern Cherokee Indian Tribe.”

Oklahoma Supreme Court Affirms Miami Tribe’s Immunity in Seneca Telephone Suit

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the opinion in Seneca Telephone v. Miami Tribe.

An excerpt:

In the present matter the Tribe was not engaged in any telecommunication activity. The Tribe was engaged in excavation work for another tribe on land held in fee as well as in trust by the United States Government. The United States Congress has not unequivocally waived sovereign immunity for the activities involved in the instant matter. The Tribe has not waived its sovereign immunity at any level in the present case and all issues herein presented are fully satisfied by our finding of immunity and, therefore, the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals is vacated and the trial court is reversed and remanded with instructions to dismiss.

Lower court materials here.

Okla. SCT Grants Cert to Decide Tribal Immunity Case

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the order granting certiorari in Seneca Telephone Co. v. Miami Tribe of Oklahoma: Oklahoma SCT Order

The Miami Tribe was the petitioner.

Here are most of the lower court briefs.

And the lower court opinion.

Oklahoma Supreme Court Applies Tobacco MSA to Native Wholesale Supply

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the opinion in Oklahoma ex rel. Edmundson v. Native Wholesale Supply.

An excerpt:

This appeal presents two dispositive issues for the court’s resolution: (1) Is an Oklahoma court a constitutionally sanctioned forum for the exercise of personal jurisdiction to adjudicate an alleged violation of a state statute by Native Wholesale Supply, a nonresident corporation that claims to have no minimum contacts with Oklahoma? and (2) Does federal law bar Oklahoma from enforcing the Complementary Act against Native Wholesale Supply, a tribally-chartered corporation wholly owned by an individual of Native-American ancestry? We answer the first question in the affirmative and the second in the negative.

Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations Win Injunction against Oklahoma Courts for Accepting Jurisdiction over Claims under their Gaming Compact

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the order in Choctaw Nation and Chickasaw Nation v. State of Oklahoma (W.D. Okla.): choctawchickasaworder.

If you’ll recall, the Oklahoma Supreme Court in a series of cases held that state courts were “courts of competent jurisdiction” to take jurisdiction over tort claims brought under a Class III gaming compact approved by Oklahoma voters and, later, several Oklahoma tribes.

Oklahoma tribes (with the State consenting) then invoked the arbitration provision of the compacts, arguing the Supreme Court had violated the terms of the compact. They were successful.

This federal suit followed. Very interesting case.

Oklahoma Supreme Court Orders Transfer of Indian Child Welfare Case to Puyallup Tribal Court

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion in In the Matter of M.S.

The court’s syllabus:

The Puyallup Tribe of Indians moved to transfer jurisdiction of a case involving two Puyallup Tribe Indian children to tribal court or, in the alternative, to change placement to a tribal member after the termination of the parental rights of their parents. The trial court denied relief, finding “good cause” for denying transfer existed because of the length of time the State had exercised jurisdiction prior to the Tribe’s motion, the relationships the children had developed and the relevant evidence located in Oklahoma. The Tribe appealed, and the Court of Civil Appeals affirmed. This Court previously granted certiorari.

Oklahoma Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations Federal Complaint re: State Court Jurisdiction over Casino Cases

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the complaint in Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma v. State of Oklahoma (W.D. Okla.): Choctaw Nation & Chicasaw Nation v Oklahoma Complaint.

At issue are the Oklahoma Supreme Court decisions holding that state courts are “courts of competent jurisdiction” in tort claims against tribal casinos under the Oklahoma model gaming compact (opinions here and here.).

Here is an August 2009 arbitration award affirming that state courts do not have such jurisdiction — Choctaw Chickasaw Oklahoma Arbitration Decision. And the joint referral to arbitration — Joint Referral to Binding Arbitration.

News analysis here, via Pechanga.