Western District of Washington

Nooksack Update: Rabang v. Kelly II (9th Cir.); Doucette v. Bernhardt (W.D. Wash))

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

District court materials (prior post here):

28 Doucette v. Bernhardt 3-7-19 Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment

32 Doucette v. Bernhardt 4-18-19 Defendants’ Consolidated Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment and in Support of Defendants’ Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment

33 Doucette v. Bernhardt 5-10-19 Plaintiffs’ Consolidated Reply in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment and in Opposition to Defendants’ Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment

34 Doucette v. Bernhardt 5-31-19 Reply re Defendants’ Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment

Ninth Circuit materials:

35 Rabang v. Kelly II 6-13-19 Stay Order

Above the Law Report on the Ninth Circuit’s Order Asking BNSF to Clarify Portions of Its Briefing in Dispute with Swinomish

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here.

We posted the order on the case page here.

Federal Court Rejects Last Remaining Claims in Dahlstrom v US [wrongful discharge from Sauk-Siuattle]

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Dahlstrom v. United States (W.D. Wash.):

82 Individual Defs Motion for Summary Judgment

86 Response

89 Reply

92 DCT Order

Prior posts here.

Section 1983 Claim against Puyallup Officers Dismissed

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Lewis v. United States (W.D. Wash.):

16 Amended Complaint

42 Puyallup Defendants MSJ

48 Ps Motion for Leave to Dismiss

49 Ds Response

50 DCT Order

Stillaguamish Marine U&A Allowed to Proceed [U.S. v. Washington Subproceeding 17-03]

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in United States v. Washington [subproceeding 17-03] or Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians v. State of Washington (W.D. Wash.):

60 Motion for Reconsideration of Contempt Motion

61 DCT Order Denying Reconsideration

64 Upper Skagit MTD

65 Tulalip MSJ

66 Swinomish MTD

69 Sauk-Suiattle Response

70 Jamestown & Port Gamble Response

72 Muckleshoot Response

73 Hoh Response

74 Stillaguamish Response to 65

75 Stillaguamish Response to 64 & 66

84 Skagit Reply

85 Swinomish Reply

86 Swinomish Reply

87 Tulalip Reply

91 DCT Order Denying Motions

Prior post here.

Wilson v. Horton’s Towing Cert Petition [Montana; Exhaustion; Civil Forfeiture]

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Cert Petition

Questions presented:

1. Does an Indian Tribe have authority under the second exception of Montana v. United States, 450 U.S. 544 (1981), to forfeit automobiles owned by non Native Americans for violation of tribal drug laws while on tribal land?

2. If so, does the Tribe have authority to seize a motor vehicle off reservation if it has probable cause to believe that the automobile previously contained illegal drugs while on tribal lands?

Lower court materials here.

Swinomish Indian Tribal Community v. Army Corps of Engineers Materials (so far)

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

1 Complaint

15 Answer

19 Taylor Shellfish Motion to Intervene

24 DCT Order Granting Intervention

Federal Court Refuses to Dismiss APA Suit Re: Nooksack Special Council Election

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials from Doucette v. Zinke (W.D. Wash.):

9. 9-7-18 notice of motion and interior defedendants’ motion to dismiss; memorandum of points and authorites in support thereof

11. 10-1-18 plaintiffs’ response to interior defendants’ motion to dismiss

13. 10-5-18 reply memorandum re interior defendants’ motion to dismiss

15. 12-21-18 minute order denying interior defendants’ motion to dismiss

18. 1-3-19 first amended complaint for equitable relief

Ninth Circuit Briefs in Swinomish v. BNSF

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

BNSF opening brief

Swinomish answer brief

Tribal Amicus

State Amicus

BNSF Reply

Other posts here.

Oral argument audio here.

UPDATE: ca9.pdf 

BNSF Letter Brief

Swinomish Response

 

Ninth Circuit Affirms Order Requiring Exhaustion over Tribal Seizure of Truck

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion in Wilson v. Horton’s Towing.

Briefs:

Wilson Opening Brief

US Answer Brief

Appellee Brief

Reply

Lower court materials here.