Quiet Title Act – Page 2

Plaintiff brought this action pursuant to the Quiet Title Act, 28 U.S.C. §2409A, seeking a judgment that it has the exclusive right to use, occupy, and possess the lands of the Valles Caldera National Preserve pursuant to its continuing aboriginal title to such lands. (Doc. 1). Defendant moves to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. (Doc. 14). Plaintiff opposes the motion and requests oral argument. (Doc. 18). The Court finds that oral argument is unnecessary as the Indian Claims Commission Act (ICCA), formerly codified at 25 U.S.C. §§ 70 to 70n-2, divests this Court of jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s claim.

Briefs are here.

SCOTUSBlog Preview of Salazar/Gun Lake Band v. Patchak Argument

April 23, 2012Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here.

An excerpt:

One might think that this is not the stuff of an historic oral argument. But this will be the thirty-first oral argument before the Court for Patricia Millett, who represents the Tribe, which will make her the woman with the most Supreme Court oral arguments in history.

Congrats to Pattie!!!!

Tenth Circuit Issues Quiet Title Act Opinion: Limitations Period Expired on Woman’s Claims 18 Years Before She Purchased Property

March 5, 2012Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Ouch. Here it today’s opinion in George v. United States.

A taste from the opinion:

It is this last feature of the QTA clock that poses the real problem for Ms. George. A problem because, just as the district court held, Ms. George’s predecessor in interest, Mr. Hamilton, objectively should have known of the government’s claim of right to a fence-free road as early as 1979, about thirty years before she brought suit in 2009. And this means Ms. George has come to court some 18 years too late to do anything about her problem.

Cert Petition in Salazar v. Patchak

August 25, 2011Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here:

US Cert Petition in Patchak

Questions presented:

1. Whether 5 U.S.C. § 702 waives the sovereign immunity of the United States from a suit challenging its title to lands that it holds in trust for an Indian tribe.

2. Whether a private individual who alleges injuries resulting from the operation of a gaming facility on Indian trust land has prudential standing to challenge the decision of the Secretary of the Interior to take title to that land in trust, on the ground that the decision was not authorized by the Indian Reorganization Act, ch. 576, 48 Stat. 984.

Gun Lake’s petition is here, along with a link to lower court materials.

Gun Lake Band Cert Petition in Patchak

August 25, 2011Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here:

2011.08.24 – Gun Lake Cert Petition.

I. Whether the Quiet Title Act and its reservation of the United States’ sovereign immunity in suits involving “trust or restricted Indian lands” apply to all suits concerning land in which the United States “claims an interest,” 28 U.S.C. § 2409a(a), as the Seventh, Ninth, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits have held, or whether they apply only when the
plaintiff claims title to the land, as the D.C. Circuit held.

II. Whether prudential standing to sue under federal law can be based on either (i) the plaintiff’s ability to “police” an agency’s compliance with the law, as held by the D.C. Circuit but rejected by the Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth Circuits, or (ii) interests protected by a different federal statute than the one on which suit is based, as held by the D.C. Circuit but rejected by the Federal Circuit.

Lower court materials here.