Here’s the opinion, reversing a trial court decision transferring a simple Indian child custody case to the Isleta Pueblo tribal court.
From KVIA:
Custody dispute doesn’t belong in tribal court, appeals court says
Associated Press – December 19, 2007 7:05 PM ET
SANTA FE (AP) – Custody disputes involving Indian children and their biological parents may not be transferred from state court to tribal court.
From the Connecticut Day:
By Michael J. Thomas
We know you have been following recent events here at Mashantucket involving union activity. We are writing to you so that you might understand the position of the tribal nation, and hopefully understand that just as you are concerned with the rights of our workers, so are we.
Plains Commerce Bank’s cert petn reply brief is here: Reply Brief
All other materials are at our previous post.
The case, In re Lawrence H., is here.
From the court’s intro:
Ida H. and Jose O. appeal the order of the separate juvenile court of Douglas County that terminated their parental rights to their son Lawrence H., also known as Faren H. (Faren). Because we conclude that the juvenile court erred in deferring its ruling on the motion to transfer of the Omaha Tribe of Nebraska (Omaha Tribe), we reverse the juvenile court’s denial of the motion to transfer, vacate and dismiss the order terminating parental rights, and remand with directions to transfer the matter to tribal court.
Plains Commerce Bank recently filed a cert petition in this matter, which involves a tribal court judgment against Plains Commerce. The bank argues the tribal court didn’t have jurisdiction over it, despite waiving that argument before the tribal court.
Here are the materials:
From the Peninsula Daily News:
By Jim Casey, Peninsula Daily News
NEAH BAY – The five members of the Makah tribe accused of illegally killing a whale will go to trial in tribal court Jan. 22.
The Northern District of New York refused to dismiss a claim seeking to enforce a tribal court judgment against Harrah’s for an amount (including interest) approaching $3 Billion. The case is Vacco v. Harrah’s Operating Co., Inc.
Legal materials and news coverage below:
Judge Martin of the Eastern Band Cherokee tribal court has published “Federal Malpractice in Indian Country and the ‘Law of the Place’: A Re-examination of Williams v. United States Under Existing Law of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians” in the Campbell Law Review.
From the Las Cruces Sun-News (h/t Indianz):
ALBUQUERQUE – Months before the Navajo Nation’s first casino is scheduled to open, a group is planning to sue over the validity of legislation that provides for financing the development of that casino and others.
From the Seattle Times:
Five Makah tribal members who already face federal charges for killing a gray whale off Neah Bay in September have now been charged in Makah Tribal Court for participating in the unauthorized hunt.
The charges were filed in tribal court on Nov. 16 but weren’t made public until Monday, when the last of the five was officially served with court papers, said Makah tribal attorney John Arum.
Wayne Johnson, Frankie Gonzales, Andrew Noel, Theron Parker and William Secor each face five charges in tribal court, including the violation of the tribe’s Gray Whale Management Plan.
If convicted, they could face up to a year in the tribal jail, a $5,000 fine and a three-year suspension of their tribal fishing rights for participating in the Sept. 8 hunt.
The five were charged in federal court in Tacoma last month and pleaded not guilty to misdemeanor violations of the federal Marine Mammal Protection Act.
It is unclear whether the men will first be tried in federal or tribal court, Arum said. Arraignment on the tribal-court charges is expected in the next two or three weeks, he said.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.