Here’s an interesting Rule 19 motion — the State of Oklahoma has sued Tyson Foods and other poultry producers over the pollution of the Illinois River (news article here). The defendants now claim that the Cherokee Nation owns the riverbed and are therefore indispensable parties to the suit, mandating the dismissal of the suit if the Nation refuses to be joined as a party. (H/T Todd)
tribal sovereign immunity
Tribal Judicial Immunity in Federal Criminal Cases
In U.S. v. Wahtony, the District of Idaho held that a federal criminal defendant’s subpoena of a tribal judge’s background must be quashed on sovereign immunity grounds.
Wrongful Discharge Complaint Against Stockbridge-Munsee Dismissed
Sovereign immunity and a lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction barred this wrongful discharge complaint in Louis v. Stockbridge-Munsee Community, decided in the Eastern District of Wisconsin.
Kendall v. Chief Leschi School — Sovereign Immunity & False Claims Act
The False Claims Act does not operate to waive tribal sovereign immunity.
Eighth Circuit: Oglala Sioux Tribe Waiver of Immunity
The Eighth Circuit held in Oglala Sioux Tribe v. C&W Enterprises that the tribe waived its immunity from suit in an enforcement action in state court despite the fact that the tribe had not expressly waived its immunity via the contract. Here are the materials:
Snoqualmie Tribal Leadership Dispute in Federal Court
Here is the news article. An excerpt:
A federal judge might be the last hope for banished members of the Snoqualmie Tribe who appeared in court Tuesday in their effort to regain tribal membership.
U.S. District Court Judge James L. Robart said he would issue a written ruling later as to whether the case is even properly before him or should be dismissed.
Only then — if he rules in favor of the banished members — would he get to the merits of the case.
And here are the materials:
petition-for-writ-of-habeas-corpus
snoqualmie-rule-19-motion-to-dismiss [!!!]
Yet Another Opinion from CA9 in the Blackfeet Housing Authority Case
Here is the relevant change:
In our earlier opinions, we declined to require Plaintiffs to exhaust their tribal court remedies. Instead, we held that the Blackfeet Tribe had waived tribal immunity through the enabling ordinance that established the Housing Authority. Marceau II, 519 F.3d at 842-44; Marceau I, 455 F.3d at 978-83; see also Kiowa Tribe of Okla. v. Mfg. Techs., Inc., 523 U.S. 751, 754 (1998) (noting that “an Indian tribe is subject to suit only where Congress has authorized the suit or the tribe has waived its immunity”). Our doing so was in error, and we now vacate that holding and decline to reach the issue. Whether or not the Tribe waived tribal immunity, the tribal court must have the first opportunity to address all issues within its jurisdiction, including that one.
D.C. Circuit Decides Freedmen Case
Mullins v. Sycuan Band — Tort Claim Dismissed
This can be what happens when you sue someone while represented by an attorney who is not licensed in the proper state bar. The court dismissed the tort claim against the tribe because the attorney wasn’t licensed in California, but noted it would have dismissed the claim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, too.
Hunt Construction Group v. Oneida Indian Nation
In this short order, the Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court reads the tribal waiver of sovereign immunity closely, holding that while the portion of the contract that reads
defendant “hereby expressly, unequivocally, and irrevocably waives its sovereign immunity from suit solely for the limited purpose of enforcement of the terms of this Agreement”
does indeed waive the Nation’s sovereign immunity in this matter, the portion that reads
[defendant] hereby consents to submit to personal jurisdiction of those courts of the State of New York and of the United States with competent subject matter jurisdiction located in the City of Syracuse, New York and the parties agree that all actions related to this Agreement shall be brought or defended in such courts ” (emphasis added).
means that the suit can only be brought in the City of Syracuse, not in Oneida County. This order overturns the lower court ruling which denied dismissal.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.