Federal Court Denies Discovery into Tribal Judicial Bias Claims

Here is the order in FMC Corp. v. Shoshone-Bannock Tribes (D. Idaho):

43 DCT Order Denying Discovery

An excerpt:

To allow a litigant to conduct full-blown discovery here, after he failed to conduct discovery in the tribal court litigation, would ignore National Farmers and Iowa Mutual. Those cases directed that all issues be fully presented to the tribal court so that it might cure any problems and give the federal court the benefit of its expertise. If a due process issue like judicial bias is not fully developed through discovery before being presented to the tribal court – and the litigant simply sits on his discovery rights until he gets into federal court – the tribal court never gets a chance to review the discovery, apply its expertise, and cure any unfair judicial bias revealed by the discovery. That is antithetical to the analysis of National Farmers and Iowa Mutual.

Briefs here. The tribal court decision below is here.

Materials (so far) in FMC v. Shoshone-Bannock Tribes (Tribal Court Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Tribal Judgment)

Here:

10 FMC Complaint

12 Tribe Answer

36 FMC Brief re Discovery

35 Tribe Brief re Discovery

37 FMC Response

38 Shoshone-Bannock Response

H/T to law360.

The tribal court decision below is here.

Shoshone-Bannock Tribes v. FMC Corp. — Tribal Appellate Court Finds Jurisdiction over Nonmember Phosphate Plant — Opinion Now Available

Here:

FMC – Opinion Order Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (2014)

35-3 Tribal Appellate Court Decision June 2012 Part 1

35-4 Tribal Appellate Court Decision June 2012 Part 2

Prior post here.

Shoshone-Bannock Tribes v. FMC Corp. — Tribal Appellate Court Finds Jurisdiction over Nonmember Phosphate Plant

News coverage via pechanga.

If anyone has the opinion, please send along.