Agenda and registration here.
VAWA Trial Advocacy Training at Eastern Band, Aug. 24-26
Agenda and registration here.
Agenda and registration here.
| This Request for Qualifications is directed at qualified individuals and/or firms interested in serving as a Pro Tem Judge for the Nooksack Indian Tribe. The Nooksack Tribal Court exercises jurisdiction over a broad range of civil and criminal matters. A Pro Tem Judge will be appointed to hear cases, as assigned by the Chief Judge, in instances where the Nooksack Tribal Court Chief Judge is ill, disqualified, or otherwise unavailable. This is a part time, as-needed appointment, and compensation will be negotiated. Specifically, contractors providing Pro Tem Judicial services will be placed into a pool and drawn from on an as-needed basis when judicial conflicts arise.
DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: Preside over cases as assigned by the Chief Judge. Prepare and issue written orders, judgments, search and arrest warrants. Keep accurate records of cases and court hearings. MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS: Possess JD from an ABA-accredited law school and admitted to practice before the Supreme Court of the United States, or any United States Circuit Court of Appeals, or the Supreme Court of any state of the United States. Extensive experience in: (1) criminal case adjudications; (2) juvenile dependency and delinquency; (3) family law and child support; and (4) general civil case adjudications, including complex litigation. Demonstrated knowledge in the following areas: (1) Federal Indian law and policy; (2) Tribal law; and (3) Tribal customs and traditions. Is at least 30 years of age. Has never been convicted or pleaded guilty to any felony, nor been found guilty of any crime involving fraud or dishonesty. Maintain a current business license and admitted to practice before the Nooksack Tribal Court. Successfully pass a background investigation and drug test. Interested individuals (or firms) should submit a letter of interest including availability, along with a current resume and the names of at least three professional references to: Suzanne Brownrigg, Human Resources Director Nooksack Indian Tribe P.O. Box 157 Deming, WA 98244 (360) 592-5176 sbrownrigg@nooksack-nsn.gov |
| NOOKSACK INDIAN TRIBE REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS PRO TEM JUDGE SERVICES (6/2016) |
Here is the complaint in Northern Arapaho Tribe v. United States Department of the Interior (D. Mont.):
An excerpt:
This is an action for declaratory and injunctive relief and money damages brought against the United States Department of the Interior (“Department”); its Secretary; and Regional Director for the Bureau of Indian Affairs (“BIA”) for violations of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (“ISDEAA”) and regulations promulgated thereunder. The Northern Arapaho Tribe (“NAT” or “Tribe”) submitted to the BIA a contract proposal for judicial services and requested technical assistance, consultation and a waiver of any regulations that the BIA thought could prevent or impede approval. The BIA failed or refused to provide technical assistance, consultation, or the requested waiver and declined the proposal. These failures and the declination violate the ISDEAA and applicable regulations. The Tribe is entitled to declaratory and injunctive relief and damages, plus interest, pursuant to the ISDEAA.
Here are the materials in Eagleman v. Rocky Boys’ Chippewa-Cree Tribal Business Committee (D. Mont.):
16-3 Eagleman Trial Court Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
16-5 Eagleman Tribal Appellate Brief
Grant Christensen has posted “Personal Jurisdiction and Tribal Courts after Walden and Bauman: The Inadvertent Impact of Supreme Court Jurisdictional Decisions on Indian Country.”
Here is the abstract:
In 2014 the United States Supreme Court added two new cases to the canon on the meaning of due process in the context of personal jurisdiction. These cases clarified the metes and bounds of specific and general personal jurisdiction. However, decisions that fit within the state and federal court system do not always easily have cross applications to tribal courts – which nonetheless are obliged to extend due process rights via the Indian Civil Rights Act. This article takes the Supreme Court’s 2014 decisions and discusses their potential application to tribal courts and their use within Indian Country.
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
You must be logged in to post a comment.