Here.
News coverage here.
Lower court materials here.
The first commentary is from Native Nations Institute commentators Ryan Seelau and Dr. Ian Record:
Will the Supreme Court Use Bay Mills Case to Blow Up Tribal Sovereignty?
Read more at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/11/05/sovereign-immunity-and-bay-mills-case-how-tribes-can-prepare
The second commentary is from Gabriel Galanda and Ryan Dreveskracht of Galanda Broadman:
The Bay Mills Buck Stops With NIGC
Read more at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/11/06/bay-mills-buck-stops-nigcHere are the materials so far in Nepomuceno v. Cherokee Medical Services (S.D. Cal.):
An excerpt:
CMS has not come forward with any evidence of how CMS was formed, who owns CMS, how CMS is managed, and where profits from the business go. Therefore, CMS has not established that it is an arm of the Cherokee Nation entitled to tribal sovereign immunity from suit, and the Court denies CMS’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. CMS may reassert tribal sovereign immunity in a motion for summary judgment. However, any such motion should not be filed until Plaintiff has had the opportunity to conduct adequate discovery on the issue.
Here, from the Indian Law Resource Center:
Notice of Appeal – Superintendent Decision regarding Secretarial Election
Notice of Appeal – Regional Director Decision regarding Secretarial Election
Appeal of Superintendent Decision with Appendix
Notice of Appeal – Regional Director Decision with Appendix
And here also:
UPDATE — still more materials:
Earlier federal court materials here.
Here is the opinion in United Planners Financial Services of America v. Sac and Fox Nation:
An excerpt:
There is nothing in the record indicating that the Business Committee met, voted, and approved by resolution or otherwise any specific arbitration clause with Broker or approved any broker agreement, by reference to a specific agreement, which contained an arbitration clause. We do not find any error with the District Court’s finding that authorized representatives of the Nation did execute the broker agreements with Broker. This is because certain officials of the Nation were authorized by resolution to “sell, assign and endorse for transfer, certificates representing stocks, bonds, or other securities now registered or hereafter registered in the name of this corporation.” (App. Rec. at 85-88). But this general approval to engage in broker activities does not rise to the level of an express approval of any arbitration clause or waiver of tribal sovereign immunity. Thus, while we find that the broker agreements were validly approved by the Nation, we do not find valid approval of the arbitration clause that would subject the Nation to be compelled to arbitrate.
Here is the order in Harrison v. Robinson Rancheria Band of Pomo Indians Business Council (N.D. Cal.):
DCT Order Dismissing Complaint wo Prejudice
Briefs are here.
Complaint is here.
Here are the materials in Sears v. Gila River Indian Community (D. Ariz.):
Here are the updated materials:
155 Miccosuke Response to Motion to Strike
281 DCT Order Granting Motion to Strike
282 DCT Order Dismissing Complaint
An excerpt:
“No one fights dirtier or more brutally than blood; only family knows its own weaknesses, the exact placement of the heart.” Whitney Otto, How to Make an American Quilt (1991). Whitney Otto’s quote seems a particularly apt description of the emotionally and politically charged litigation, occurring in multiple judicial venues, between the named parties, whom include the following.
Motions to dismiss were here.
Miccosukee’s responses were here.
Second amended complaint here.
You must be logged in to post a comment.