Here are the materials in Stroud v. Armenta (opinion here), an unpublished case decided by the California Court of Appeals involving the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians:
tribal sovereign immunity
Suit re: Tribal Police Tort Claim Dismissed
The case is Wallulatum v. Warm Springs Confederated Tribes (D. Or.). Here are the materials:
Complaint of Former Chief Judge of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe Dismissed
The case is Miner v. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe (D. N.D.). Here are the materials:
Miner Motion for Summary Judgment
[no response]
Miner Response to Motion to Dismiss
Miner v Standing Rock DCT Opinion
North Carolina ex rel. Cooper v. Seneca-Cayuga Tobacco — Tribal Sovereign Immunity Case
The AG for the State of North Carolina cannot enforce portions of the Master Settlement Agreement against an Indian tribe, due to the tribe’s immunity. Here is the opinion from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, and the materials:
API v. Sac & Fox — Cross-Motions Pending
The case is ATTORNEY’S PROCESS AND INVESTIGATION SERVICES, INC. v. SAC & FOX TRIBE OF THE MISSISSIPPI IN IOWA.
After having been reopened (see our post here), post-tribal remedies exhaustion, the tribe filed a motion to dismiss, and the plaintiffs filed a motion for summary judgment. Both are pending after the court’s order to allow amendment of some of the pleadings.
API Resistance to Motion to Dismiss
Supreme Court Denies Cert in Indian Law Cases Today
The Supreme Court denied cert in two petitions captioned Cook v. Avi Casino Enterprises (Nos. 08-929, 08-930). It’s on page 4 of this order list.
This is good news for Indian Country (and for my student writing a paper on this subject — you reading this, J.?). There is a split of authority on the question of whether tribal business enterprises are immune from suit in a state law dram shop action, as we have discussed before. But I’m guessing the Court thinks it’s either unimportant or too much a state law question, since each state has its own version of dram shop laws and applies its own understanding of tribal sovereign immunity. But who knows….
Sixth Circuit to Decide Tribal Enterprise Immunity Case — UPDATED!
The case is Memphis Biofuels v. Chickasaw Nation Industries, being appealed to the Sixth Circuit from the Western District of Tennessee. The case involves the assertion by CNI, a Section 17 corporation, that it is entitled to sovereign immunity, and that there is no federal subject matter jurisdiction over this contract claim against it. The lower court granted CNI’s motion to dismiss and Memphis Biofuels has appealed to the Sixth Circuit.
Here are the lower court materials:
memphis-biofuels-complaint-and-exhibits
cni-motion-to-dismiss-and-exhibits
memphis-biofuels-response-to-motion-to-dismiss
memphis-biofuels-supplemental-memorandum
Sixth Circuit materials:
Tribal Court Order Regarding Attorney’s Fees Unenforceable
The Northern District of Oklahoma found that the Muscogee Tribal court did not have jurisdiction over the firm Crowe & Dunlevy who represented Thlopthlocco Tribal Town in an intratribal dispute. The case began in Muscogee Nation tribal court, but the firm eventually filed suit in federal district court to prevent enforcement of a tribal court order. Tribal sovereign immunity, Ex parte Young, judicial immunity, Rule 19 and Montana exceptions are all discussed in the decision.
Crowe & Dunlevy, P.C. v. Stidham, — F.Supp.2d —-, (N.D.Okla. Apr 24, 2009) (NO. 09-CV-095-TCK-PJC)
Federal Government Cert Opposition Brief in Marceau v. Blackfeet Housing Authority
Here is the government’s cert opp in this important sovereign immunity case — federal-cert-opp-marceau
The Supreme Court Project’s materials are here and the cert petition is here.
District Court Denies Preliminary Injunction — Oglala Sioux v. C&W Enters.
Indianz reported here. Our previous posting with links to materials is here.
Here is the opinion — dct-order-denying-preliminary-injunction
And the brief filed opposing the injunction from C&W — cw-opposition-to-motion-for-injunction
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.