Here is the order in Carney v. State of Washington (W.D. Wash.):
Prior post here.
Here are the materials so far in Carney v. State of Washington (W.D. Wash.):
10 Swinomish Motion to Dismiss
28 Swinomish Reply in Support of 10
Here is the opinion in Turtle Mountain State Bank v. Delorme:
Here are the materials:
Amended opinion–081441P
CA8 Order Granting Rehearing [explains the amendments to the earlier opinion]
South Dakota Petition for En Banc Review
Charles Mix County Petition for En Banc Review
Federal Response to En Banc Petitions
Yankton Opposition to En Banc Review
Rosebud Sioux Opposition to En Banc Petition
Earlier opinion and briefs are here.
The lower court opinion in Ho-Chunk Nation v. Wisc. Dept. of Revenue is here. Oral argument was last month.
Here are the questions presented:
Is the petitioner entitled to a refund of cigarette tax revenue for the sale of cigarettes on DeJope property pursuant to Wis. Stat. §§ 139.31 and 139.323 (3)?
What is the reasonable interpretation of Wis. Stat. § 139.323 (3)’s “designated . . .trust land” within the context of the sale of cigarettes on the DeJope property?
Still cannot foreclose on Indian trust land, according to the Western District of Oklahoma. Nor can banks use the doctrine of equitable subrogation to get at trust land.
american-general-finance-v-kent-dct-opinion
The case is Ho-Chunk Nation v. Wisconsin Dept. of Revenue (wisconsin-coa-opinion). An excerpt from the opinion:
This appeal concerns the Ho-Chunk Nation’s claim for a refund of cigarette taxes under Wis. Stat. § 139.323 (2005-06) in respect to sales on the DeJope property. The Tax Appeals Commission denied the claim because it concluded the DeJope property was not “designated … trust land on or before January 1, 1983” as required by the statute. See § 139.323(3). The circuit court affirmed and the Ho-Chunk Nation appeals.
We agree with the commission and the circuit court that the statutory phrase means that the United States government must hold the land in trust on or before January 1, 1983. We conclude that the United States government does not hold the land in trust until formal acceptance under 25 C.F.R. § 151.14 (2007) occurs. Because this did not occur with respect to the DeJope property until after January 1, 1983, the Ho-Chunk-Nation is not entitled to a refund. Accordingly, we affirm on this issue.
From the Leelanau Enterprise (H/T Indianz):
The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) has finally processed the paperwork required to place 14 parcels totaling 132 acres of land “in trust” for the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians.
You must be logged in to post a comment.