Here is the unpublished opinion in Asker v. Seminole Tribe of Florida Inc.:
Briefs here.
Here is the unpublished opinion in Asker v. Seminole Tribe of Florida Inc.:
Briefs here.
Here are the materials in Kodiak Oil & Gas (USA) Inc. v. Burr (D.N.D.):
29-9 mha nation supreme court opinion
45 tribal judge motion to dismiss
46 burr response to motion for pi
48 tribal judge response to motion for pi
54 kodiak reply in support of motion for pi
62 tribal judge reply in support of mtd
Here are the materials in Charles v. Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation (D. Utah):
44 motion to dismiss [mootness]
Here is the order in McKesson Corp. v. Hembree (N.D. Okla.):
An excerpt:
Oklahoma is among the states with the highest number of opioid prescriptions per one hundred people and has a high overdose death rate. Tribal communities have been tragically affected, as have other communities in Oklahoma. Numerous cities, counties and states throughout the country, including the state of Oklahoma, have filed lawsuits against various opioid manufactures, pharmaceutical distributors, and other businesses allegedly responsible for the proliferation of opioid drugs. This proceeding concerns a lawsuit by the Cherokee Nation against a number of opioid distributors and pharmacies. However, the question before the Court is not the merits of the Cherokee Nation’s lawsuit but rather the boundaries of tribal court jurisdiction. The Attorney General of the Cherokee Nation has filed suit not in state court but in the tribal district court of the Cherokee Nation. Do the tribal courts of the Cherokee Nation have jurisdiction over this particular action? The Court finds they do not.
Briefs here.
Here are the materials so far in Halcón Operating Co. Inc. V. Rez Rock N Water LLC (D.N.D.):
Here is the order in FMC Corp. v. Shoshone-Bannock Tribes (D. Idaho):
64-1 Tribe Motion on Montana 1
65-1 Tribe Motion on Montana 2
66-1 Tribe Motion on Tribal Process
67-2 FMC Motion on Tribal Process
72 FMC Opposition re Montana 1
73 FMC Opposition re Montana 2
74 FMC Opposition re Tribal Process
76 Tribe Response re Montana 1
77 Tribe Response re Montana 2
News coverage here.
Here are the materials in Coeur d’Alene Tribe v. Hawks (D. Idaho):
An excerpt:
But here, the Hawks have not challenged the Tribal Court‘s jurisdiction to make the award, and the Tribe has not sought a declaratory judgment that its courts had jurisdiction over the Hawks. Instead, the Tribe is simply asking a federal court to domesticate and enforce a Tribal Court Judgment. While such a claim has a basis in Idaho law and can be enforced in Idaho courts pursuant to Idaho Code § 10-1401 et. seq., the Tribe cites no federal statute or law that is in dispute and that could be used to create a federal question.
Download(PDF) brief in the matter of McKesson Corp. et al. v. Hembree et al., 17-cv-00323 (D. Okla.):
Links: Previous posts, Murphy v. Royal (10th Cir. Aug. 8, 2017)
You must be logged in to post a comment.