Remaining Federal Law Claims in Gilmore v. Salazar Dismissed

Here is that opinion: Gilmore v. Salazar II

The earlier order is here.

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.

Quapaw Grievance Committee Resolution

Here: Quapaw Grievance Resolution 3.26.10.

Allegations of tribal business committee irregularities….

Quapaw v. Blue Tee & United States (Tar Creek Mine Superfund)

The Quapaw Tribe brought suit against mining companies and the United States over the Tar Creek Superfund Site. The private defendants have been successful in having the tribe’s claims for medical monitoring of tribal members dismissed on the grounds that the tribe didn’t have authority under the parens patriae doctrine to bring those claims. Other claims are pending, as is the United States’ motion for summary judgment.

A description of the mine from the recent district court order is here:

Continue reading