Source: https://www.narf.org/nill/bulletins/federal/2019.html
Timestamp: 2019-11-11 20:00:13
Document Index: 608061560

Matched Legal Cases: ['art.\n2019', 'art.\n2019', '§ 1983', '§ 1983', '§ 1983', '§ 1983', 'art 83', '§ 1981', '§ 1981']

2019 Federal Courts Cases
Next update should be ready by: November 13, 2019
Drake v. Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community
Materials via Turtle Talk
2019 WL 5653447
No. CV-19-02957-PHX-MTL
Legal Topics: Sovereign Immunity; Americans with Disabilities Act
Boon-Bey v. Skwierawski
2019 WL 5594924
No. 19-CV-985-JPS
Legal Topics: Jurisdiction; Federal Recognition
Oneida Indian Nation v. US Department of the Interior
2019 WL 5302822
No. 18-2607
Legal Topics: Federal Recognition; Names
Johnson v. Oneida Nation Enters., LLC
2019 WL 5091952
No. 5:19-CV-853
Legal Topics: Title VII
2019 WL 5104742
No. 3:19-cv-01308-HZ
Legal Topics: Sexual Misconduct
2019 WL 5061386
No. 2018-1720
Legal Topics: Fiduciary Trust
Caddo Nation of Oklahoma v. Witchita and Affiliated Tribes
2019 WL 4898669
Legal Topics: National Environmental Policy Act; National Historic Preservation Act
The Indigenous American People Inhabiting the County of Wayne, Michigan v. Wayne County Municipal Corporation
2019 WL 5061048
No. 2:19-cv-12579-LJM-DRG
Legal Topics: Land in Dispute
2019 WL 4751463
No. 18-35369
Legal Topics: Boundary Dispute
2019 WL 4773929
No. CIV 15-5062-JLV
Legal Topics: Interior Board of Indian Appeals
2019 WL 4740604
No. CIV 12-0800 JB/JHR
Legal Topics: Cultural Resources; Trust Relationship
Fort McDermitt Paiute and Shoshone Tribe v. Azar
2019 WL 4711401
Civil Action No. 17-837 (TJK)
Legal Topics: Trust Relationship; Indian Health Service
2019 WL 4582841
No. 17-55647
Legal Topics: Wind Energy; Bald and Golden Eagles Protection Act
2019 WL 4546908
No. 17-15616
*Synopsis: Indian tribe and environmental organizations brought actions alleging that Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) continuation of unproven geothermal leases violated Geothermal Steam Act (GSA), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), and federal government's fiduciary trust obligation to Indian tribes. After cases were consolidated, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, John A. Mendez, J., entered judgment on pleadings in BLM's favor, and plaintiffs appealed. The Court of Appeals, 793 F.3d 1147, reversed and remanded. On remand, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, John A. Mendez, J., 2017 WL 395479, entered summary judgment in plaintiffs' favor, and BLM appealed.
*Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Cristen, Circuit Judge, held that:
1) It had jurisdiction to review district court's order, and
2) Unproven geomthermal leases were not eligible for 40-year unit continuation based on single proven lease in unit.
No. CIV 19-5026
Legal Topics: Keystone XL Pipeline
2019 WL 4572805
No. 17-5091
Legal Topics: Housing and Community Development Act
Irving D. Jumping Eagle v. Warren
2019 WL 4572790
CIV 18-4134
Legal Topics: Indian Child Welfare Act
2019 WL 4451326
No. CV-19-08026-PCT-SPL
Legal Topics: Navajo-Hopi Land Settlement Act of 1974
Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe v. Terwilliger
2019 WL 4452246
No. 14-4171
Legal Topics: Indian Gaming and Regulatory Act
Ronald Oertwich v. Traditional Village of Togiak
2019 WL 4345975
No. 3:19-cv-00082 JWS
Legal Topics: Banishment; Tribal Sovereign Immunity
Yocha Dehe Wintun Naion v. Newsom
2019 WL 4259755
No. 2:19-cv-00025-JAM-AC
Legal Topics: Tribal-State Compacts
Legal Topics: Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act; Indian Country Payday Lenders
2019 WL 4229068
No. 18-1271
*Synopsis: Federally recognized Indian tribe that owned and operated casino, hotel, and store on reservation land brought action against Governor of State of South Dakota and state officials, alleging that state was not entitled to collect use tax on non-gaming purchases by individuals who were not tribe members, and was not entitled to deny tribe's renewals for alcoholic beverage licenses issued to the casino and the store. The United States District Court for the District of South Dakota, Lawrence L. Piersol, Senior District Judge, 269 F.Supp.3d 910, granted in part and denied in part parties' cross-motions for summary judgment. State appealed.
*Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Loken, Circuit Judge, held that:
1) Imposition of South Dakota’s use tax on nonmember purchases of amenities at casino, hotel, and gift shop was preempted by federal law, and
2) Tribe failed to meet its burden to demonstrate that the South Dakota’s alcohol license requirement was not reasonably necessary to further its interest in collecting valid state taxes.
Colloton, Circuit Judge, filed opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part.
2019 WL 4231360
No. 18-2750
*Synopsis: Indian tribe brought action against Governor, State Treasurer, and State Secretary of Revenue, seeking declaration that federal law preempted imposition of statewide excise tax on gross receipts of nonmember contractor for services performed in renovating and expanding tribe's gaming casino located on reservation. The United States District Court for the District of South Dakota, Karen E. Schreier, J., 325 F.Supp.3d 995, entered summary judgment in tribe's favor, and state appealed.
*Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Loken, Circuit Judge, held that Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) did not preempt tax on contractos's gross receipts.
Colloton, Circuit Judge, concurred in judgment and filed opinion.
Kelly, Circuit Judge, dissented and filed opinion.
Cherokee Nation v. Bernhardt
2019 WL 4197483
No. 17-7042, 17-7044
*Synopsis: Indian tribe brought action against Department of the Interior and Bureau of Indian Affairs officials, in which another federally recognized tribe intervened, challenging Bureau's decision to grant intervenor's application asking that it take into trust parcel of land that sat entirely within boundaries of first tribe's former reservation to enable intervenor to develop it into tribal and cultural center. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma, No. 6:14-CV-00428-RAW, Ronald A. White, Chief Judge, 2017 WL 2352011, entered judgment in favor of first tribe and enjoined Bureau from accepting parcel into trust. Defendants and intervenor appealed.
*Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Eid, Circuit Judge, held that:
1) District Court's order was final and appealable, not an administrative remand;
2) Bureau was authorized under the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA) to take subject land into trust;
3) Bureau was not required to obtain consent of first tribe to take land into trust for other tribe;
4) Bureau's consideration of jurisdictional-conflicts criterion of regulation governing land-into-trust applications was not arbitrary and capricious; and
5) Bureau's consideration of administrative-burden criterion of regulation governing land-into-trust applications was not arbitrary and capricious.
Swinomish Indian Tribal Community v. Azar
2019 WL 4261368
No. 18-cv-1156
United States of America v. Jeffrey Antonio
2019 WL 4180406
No. 18-2118
Legal Topics: Indian Pueblo Lands Act
Rosita George v. Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation
2019 WL 4081144
No. CV-17-08200-PCT-DLR
Legal Topics: Navajo-Hopi Settlement Act
USA, ex rel. Dalhstrom, State of Washington, ex rel. Dalhstrom v. Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe of Washington
2019 WL 4082944
Case No. C16-0052JLR
Legal Topics: False Claims Act; Tribal Sovereignty
Legal Topics: Tribal Court Jurisdiction
Beam v. Naha
2019 WL 3937390
No. 18-15968
Legal Topics: Education; First Amendment
U.S. v. Begay
2019 WL 3884261
No. 14-10080
*Synopsis: Defendant was convicted, following a jury trial in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, Neil V. Wake, J, of second-degree murder and discharging a firearm during a crime of violence in Indian country. He appealed.
*Holdings: The Court of Appeals, D.W. Nelson, Circuit Judge, held that:
1) District Court did not plainly err in failing to instruct jury on absence of heat of passion as an element of second-degree murder; but
2) Defendant's conviction for second-degree murder in Indian Country did not qualify as a categorical crime of violence.
Smith, Circuit Judge, filed opinion dissenting in part.
2019 WL 3886168
No. 17-56791
*Synopsis: Indian tribe and four enrolled tribal members filed § 1983 action against county sheriff and deputies for allegedly contravening federal statutory and constitutional rights by deputies detaining and issuing citations to tribal members for violating California regulatory traffic laws. The United States District Court for the Central District of California, D.C. No. 5:15-cv-01538-DMG-FFM, Dolly M. Gee, J., granted defendants summary judgment and subsequently denied plaintiffs' motion to amend judgment. Plaintiffs appealed.
*Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Hurwitz, Circuit Judge, held that:
1) Deputies issued citations within Indian country;
2) Deputies lacked jurisdiction to enforce state regulatory traffic laws in Indian Country;
3) Enrolled members had cause of action under § 1983; but
4) Tribe lacked cause of action under § 1983.
Navajo Nation v. U.S. Department of the Interior
2019 WL 3997370
No. CV-03-00507-PCT-GMS
Legal Topics: Indian Water Rights; Federal Trust Relationship
Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe v. County of Mille Lacs, Minnesota
2019 WL 3956494
Case No. 17-cv-5155-SRN-LIB
Barbre v. Whitten
2019 WL 3976518
Case No. CIV 18-259-RAW-KEW
Legal Topics: Habeas Corpus; Indian Country Crimes Act
United States of America v. Kevin Vigil
2019 WL 3881702
Criminal No. 18-739-MV
Legal Topics: Indian Country Crimes Act; Major Crimes Act
Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians v. Whitmer
2019 WL 3854299
No. 1:15-cv-850
Legal Topics: Treaty Rights; Reservation Diminishment
2019 WL 3816573
No. 14-cv-1835
Big Sandy Rancheria Enterprises v. Becerra
2019 WL 3803627
No. 1:18-cv-00958-DAD-EPG
Legal Topics: Indian Taxation; California Tax Code
2019 WL 3759491
No. 18-11479
Coeur d'Alene Tribe v. Hawks
2019 WL 3756886
No. 17-35755
*Synopsis: Indian tribe filed action seeking to enforce a tribal court judgment against nonmembers. The United States District Court for the District of Idaho, B. Lynn Winmill, Chief Judge, dismissed based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Tribe appealed.
*Holding: The Court of Appeals, Clifton, Circuit Judge, held that Indian tribe's action to enforce a tribal court judgment against a nonmember presented a substantial issue of federal law.
United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians v. F.C.C.
2019 WL 3756373
No. 18-1129
Legal Topics: National Historic Preservation Act
2019 WL 3676342
No. 17-16838
Yankton Sioux Tribe v. Bernhardt
2019 WL 3753616
Civil Action No. 03-01603
Legal Topics: Trust Relationship; Sovereign Immunity
Kodiak Oil & Gas Inc. v. Burr
2019 WL 3540423
Nos. 18-1824, 18-1856
Legal Topics: Tribal Court Jurisdiction; Tribal Court Exhaustion Doctrine
2019 WL 3432470
*Synopsis: Native American state residents brought action against North Dakota Secretary of State, alleging that state's statutory voter identification requirements violated equal protection. The United States District Court for the District of North Dakota, Daniel L. Hovland, Chief Judge, 2018 WL 1612190, granted in part residents' motion for preliminary injunction. Secretary appealed.
Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Colloton, Circuit Judge, held that:
1) Residents lacked likelihood of success on merits of challenge to requiring presentation of document with current residential street address, and
2) Residents lacked likelihood of success on merits of challenge to enumerated forms of identification.
Kelly, Circuit Judge, filed a dissenting opinion.
2019 WL 3404210
No. 17-17320
*Synopsis: Coalition of tribal, regional, and national conservation organizations brought action against the United States Department of the Interior, its Secretary, and several bureaus within the agency, challenging a variety of agency actions that reauthorized coal mining activities on land reserved to Indian tribe. Tribal-owned corporation, which owned the mine in question, intervened for the limited purpose of moving to dismiss. The United States District Court for the District of Arizona, Steven P. Logan, J., 2017 WL 4277133, dismissed. Organizations appealed.
Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Friedland, J., held that:
1) Corporation had legally protected interest in subject matter of the action, as required for corporation to be required party that had to be joined if feasible;
2) No existing party could adequately represent interest of corporation in the action, as required for corporation to be required party that had to be joined if feasible;
3) Corporation was an "arm" of Indian tribe that enjoyed tribe's sovereign immunity from suit, and thus could not feasibly be joined as required party to the action;
4) Organizations' action could not, in good conscience, continue without corporation, and thus, dismissal of action was warranted; and
5) Public rights exception to traditional joinder rules did not apply.
Landreth v. United States
2019 WL 3335012
Legal Topics: Land into Trust
2019 WL 3309394
No. 2018-2227
*Synopsis: Lessees, who had entered into five agricultural leases with Indian tribe, brought action again United States, alleging that government breached leases by terminating them and ordering lessees to vacate land, and that government's actions constituted taking without just compensation under Fifth Amendment. The United States Court of Federal Claims, No. 1:16-cv-00107-EJD, Edward J. Damich, Senior Judge, 135 Fed.Cl. 39, dismissed complaint, and lessees appealed.
*Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Dyk, Circuit Judge, held that:
1) United States was not party to leases;
2) United States' alleged revival of leases did not subject it to liability for breach of implied-in-fact contracts, and;
3) Bureau of Indian Affairs' (BIA) alleged violation of regulations in canceling leases did not give rise to takings claims.
Johnson v. Oneida Nation Enterprise, LLC
2019 WL 3321892
Legal Topics: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
Emil Flute and Patricia Flute v. United States of America
2019 WL 3325353
No. 4:18-CV-04112-RAL
United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Southern Divison.
Legal Topics: Federal Torts Claims Act; Indian Health Services
Cedar Band of Paiutes v. US Department of Housing and Urban Development
2019 WL 3305919
No. 4:19-cv-30-DN-PK
Legal Topics: Federal Jurisdiction
Navajo Nation v. San Juan County
2019 WL 3121838
No. 18-4005
Legal Topics: Voting Rights; Districts
Watso v. Lourey, et al.
2019 WL 3114047
No. 18-1723
Dustin Lee MacLeod v. William Moritz
2019 WL 3072098
No. 18-cv-11653
Legal Topics: Lands; Treaty Rights
Kalispel Tribe of Indians v. United States Department of the Interior
2019 WL 3037048
No. 2:17-CV-0138-WFN
Legal Topics: Lands into Trust; Federal Trust Responsibility; Gaming
United States of America v. Paul Wollweber
2019 WL 3017123
No. 1-16-cr-04008-JCH-1
Legal Topics: Land Status; Enrollment
2019 WL 2864341
*Synopsis: Borrowers brought putative class action against lending entity, and related defendants, alleging that payday loans carried unlawfully high interest rates. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, No. 3:17–cv–00461–REP–RCY, Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge, 329 F.Supp.3d 248, denied motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Defendants filed interlocutory appeal.
*Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Gregory, Chief Judge, held that: burden of proof to demonstrate tribal immunity as an arm of the tribe was on party seeking such immunity, and entities were entitled to sovereign tribal immunity. Reversed and remanded with instructions.
Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. United States of America; Department of Health and Human Services
2019 WL 2953259
No. 3:16-CV-03038-RAL
Legal Topics: Indian Health Care Improvement Act
Wilson and Franke, M.D. v. Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium
2019 WL 2870080
No. 3:16-cv-00195-TMB
Legal Topics: Unlawful Termination; Financial Fraud
2019 WL 2578582
No. 3:18-cv-05918-RBL
Legal Topics: Sovereign Immunity, Ex parte Young
Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe v. Ryan Zinke
2019 WL 2569919
No. 18-2242 (RMC)
Legal Topics: Land into Trust; Under Federal Jurisdiction
Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe v. United States Department of Agriculture
2019 WL 2394356
4:19-CV-04094-KES
Legal Topics: Hemp Production
Pauma Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pauma and Yuima Reservation v. Unite Here International Union
2019 WL 2358756
No. 16-cv-2660-BAS-AGS
Legal Topics: National Labor Relations Board
Rincon Mushroom Corporation of America v. B.M, J.C., V.W., G.P., S.S., C.K., D.W., DOE CO., DOE I, DOE II
2019 WL 2341376
No. 09-cv-2330-WQH-JLB
Legal Topics: Exhaustion of Tribal Court Remedies
Legal Topics: Assimilative Crimes Act; Indian Country Crimes Act
Kim R. Jim v. Shiprock Associated Schools, Inc.
2019 WL 2285918
No. CIV 17-1114 RB/JHR
Legal Topics: Indian Tribe - Definition of
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Dakota Access, LLC
2019 WL 2028709
No. 16-1534
Legal Topics: Oil & Gas Pipelines; Documents for Administrative Record
Diné Citizens Against Ruining Our Environment v. Bernhardt
2019 WL 1999298
No. 18-2089
United States District Court, Tenth Circuit.
*Synopsis: Environmental advocacy groups brought action alleging that Bureau of Land Management (BLM) violated National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in granting applications for permits to drill (APD) horizontal, multi-stage hydraulically fracked wells on public lands. The United States District Court for the District of New Mexico, No. 1:15-CV-00209-JB-LF, James O. Browning, J., 312 F.Supp.3d 1031, entered judgment in BLM's favor, and groups appealed.
*Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Briscoe, Circuit Judge, held that:
1) groups had standing to bring action;
2) environmental assessments (EA) did not arbitrarily define area of potential effects (APE) for each APD in way that excluded cultural sites;
3) EAs adequately analyzed cumulative effects of developing new APDs;
4) BLM did not abuse its discretion under National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) when it failed to consult with state historic preservation office (SHPO);
5) EAs were properly tiered to its previous environmental impact statement (EIS);
6) NEPA required BLM to consider cumulative impacts of reasonably foreseeable wells in EAs;
7) groups failed to carry their burden to show that BLM acted arbitrarily or capriciously in analyzing air pollution impacts; and
8) BLM abused its discretion by failing to consider cumulative water impacts.
Muscogee Creek Indian Freedman Band, Inc. v. David Bernhardt
2019 WL 1992787
No. 18-1705
Legal Topics: Exhaustion of Tribal Remedies
Related News: Freedman Citizenship Lawsuit Against Oklahoma Tribe Rejected (U.S. News) 5/10/19
Stockbridge-Munsee Community v. Wisconsin
2019 WL 1923403
No. 17-cv-06478-RS
Legal Topics: Gaming; Statute of Limitations; Sovereign Immunity
Gingras v. Think Finance, Inc.
2019 WL 1780951
Nos. 16-2019-cv (L); 16-2132-cv; 16-2135-cv; 16-2138-cv; 16-2140-cv (Con)
*Synopsis: Borrowers, who were Vermont residents, brought putative class action against individuals and companies involved in online lending operation owned by Indian tribe in Montana, alleging that “payday” loans offered by lender violated Vermont and federal law due to their usurious interest rates and other unlawful features, and seeking prospective declaratory and injunctive relief against tribal officers in charge of lender as well as award of money damages against other defendants. Some defendants moved to dismiss on the basis of tribal sovereign immunity, and all defendants moved to compel arbitration under terms of loan agreements. The United States District Court for the District of Vermont, Geoffrey W. Crawford, J., 2016 WL 2932163, denied both motions, and subsequently denied motion to clarify, 2016 WL 4442792. Defendants appealed.
*Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Hall, Circuit Judge, held that:
1) the court had jurisdiction over this interlocutory appeal;
2) addressing an issue of first impression for the court, tribal sovereign immunity did not bar the suit because plaintiffs could sue tribal officers in their official capacities under a theory analogous to Ex parte Young for prospective, injunctive relief based on violations of state and substantive federal law occurring off of tribal lands;
3) borrowers' Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) claims could proceed; and
4) the arbitration clauses of the parties' loan agreements were unenforceable and unconscionable.
Related News: Second Circuit Decision has Implications for Native American Sovereign Immunity and Predatory Lending Practices (JD Supra) 5/10/19
Duanna Knighton v. Cedarville Rancheria of Northern Paiute Indains
2019 WL 1781404
No. 17-15515
*Synopsis: Former tribal administrator sought declaratory and injunctive relief against tribe, tribal court, and tribal court judge to avoid tribal court jurisdiction over claims that she defrauded tribe and breached her fiduciary duties to it. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, William Horsley Orrick, J., 234 F.Supp.3d 1042, dismissed action. Former administrator appealed.
*Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Piersol, Senior Judge for the District of South Dakota, sitting by designation, held that:
1) tribal court had subject matter jurisdiction over tribe’s claims against administrator;
2) administrator reasonably should have anticipated that her conduct on tribal land would have fallen within tribe’s regulatory jurisdiction;
3) conduct of administrator threatened or had some direct effect on political integrity, economic security, or health or welfare of tribe; and
4) tribe’s adjudicatory authority did not exceed its regulatory authority over conduct of administrator during her employment.
2019 WL 2610965
No. EDCV 13-00883 JGB
Legal Topics: Tribal Water Rights - Groundwater
2019 WL 1606317
No. 18-2129
*Synopsis: Defendant pled guilty in the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico, No. 1:17-CR-00699-MV-1, Martha Vazquez, J., of assimilative New Mexico crime of child abuse, and he appealed.
*Holdings: The Court of Appeals, McHugh, Circuit Judge, held that district court's mathematical error in calculating defendant's sentence was not harmless.
James Clay and Audrey Osceola v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
152 T.C. No. 13
Nos. 13104-11
*Synopsis: Taxpayers, who were members of Native American tribe, petitioned for redetermination of income tax deficiencies arising from unreported taxable income received from tribal casino revenue during three taxable years at issue. Actions were consolidated.
*Holdings: The Tax Court, Pugh, J., held that:
1) taxpayers were not entitled to argue issues relating to the “general welfare doctrine” in deficiency proceeding;
2) it was not appropriate to reopen record to admit contract between tribe and developer to construct, manage and operate gaming facility for tribe, as well as letter from tribe to Bureau of Indian Affairs' acting director;
3) taxpayers were liable for federal income taxes owed on tribal gaming revenue distributions; bu
4) taxpayers were not liable for accuracy-related penalties due to substantial understatement of income tax.
Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians v. David Bernhardt
2019 WL 1789458
No. 1:18-cv-02035 (TNM)
Legal Topics: Tribal Sales Tax
2019 WL 1643634
Legal Topics: Tribal Colleges - Arm-of-the-Tribe
Employers Mutual Casualty Company v. Ethel B Branch
2019 WL 1489121
No. CV-18-08110-PCT-DWL
Legal Topics: Jurisdiction
Related News: Ethel Branch, former Navajo Nation Attorney General, to return to Kanji & Katzen and Lead Flagstaff office. (Turtle Talk) 4/9/19
2019 WL 1285060
Briefs via Turtle Talk
No. 17-55604
*Synopsis: Indian tribes brought action against state seeking declaratory judgment that duration provision of tribal-state gaming compacts violated Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA). The United States District Court for the Central District of California, No. 5:16-cv-01347-JFW-MRW, John F. Walter, J., 2017 WL 2971864, entered summary judgment in state's favor, and tribes appealed.
*Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Gilliam, District Judge, sitting by designation, held that as matter of first impression, duration provisions were permitted by IGRA.
2019 WL 1285055
No. 17-30022
*Synopsis: Motorist charged with narcotics offenses, as result of evidence discovered by tribal officer after seizing motorist on public highway that ran across reservation, filed motion to suppress this evidence. The United States District Court for the District of Montana, No. 1:16-cr-00042-SPW-1, Susan P. Watters, J., 2017 WL 499896, granted motion, and government appealed.
1) as matter of first impression, exclusionary rule applies in federal court prosecutions to evidence obtained in violation, not of the Fourth Amendment itself, but of the Indian Civil Rights Act's (ICRA’s) Fourth Amendment counterpart, and
2) tribal officer's extra-jurisdictional acts violated the ICRA’s Fourth Amendment counterpart and required suppression of evidence.
Texas v. Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas
2019 WL 1199564
No. 18-40116
*Synopsis: Indian tribe brought action against state seeking declaratory judgment that its gaming activities on tribal lands were permitted under Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA). State filed counterclaim to enjoin tribe from conducting gaming activities based on Ysleta del Sur Pueblo and Alabama and Coushatta Indian Tribes of Texas Restoration Act. After state's motion for permanent injunction was granted, state moved to realign parties, moved for contempt, and sought declaration that IGRA did not apply, and tribe moved for relief from injunction. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Keith F. Giblin, United States Magistrate Judge, entered summary judgment in state's favor, 208 F.Supp.2d 670, and denied tribe's motion for relief from injunction, 298 F.Supp.3d 909. Tribe appealed.
*Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Jerry E. Smith, Circuit Judge, held that National Indian Gaming Commission's (NIGC) determination that IGRA governed question of whether tribe could conduct class II gaming on tribal lands was not entitled to Chevron deference.
2019 WL 1145150
Tolowa Nation v. United States of America
2019 WL 1975442
2019 WL 1119912
No. 17-35368
*Synopsis: Indian community brought action against Department of Interior and National Indian Gaming Commission, challenging Interior's determination that tribe was ineligible for gaming for purposes of Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA). The United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, Benjamin H. Settle, J., 242 F.Supp.3d 1156, granted summary judgment in favor of Department of Interior. Tribe appealed.
*Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Morgan Christen, Circuit Judge, held that:
1) a tribe must appear on the Secretary's annual list of federally recognized tribes in order to be eligible to engage in class II gaming, and
2) Franks Landing Act did not grant Community permission to engage in class II gaming.
Related News: Frank's Landing Indian Community loses decision in sovereignty case (Indianz) 3/13/19
2019 WL 1417247
No. 16-798C
*Synopsis: Native American farmer filed an action against government, alleging that the government breached a settlement agreement of a class action discrimination suit brought by Native American farmers against the Department of Agriculture and breached its duty of good faith and fair dealing, when government directed farmer's two witnesses, who were employees of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to refrain from testifying and providing evidence on behalf of the farmer in support of his claim for settlement funds. The United States Court of Federal Claims, No. 1:16-cv-00798-BAF, Bohdan A. Futey, J., dismissed the action. Farmer appealed. The Court of Appeals, Dyk, Circuit Judge, 899 F.3d 1373, reversed and remanded. On remand, government renewed its motion to dismiss.
*Holdings: The Court of Federal Claims, Sweeney, Chief Judge, held that:
1) Department of Agriculture had no duty to respond to farmer's notice of violation of agreement and, thus, farmer failed to state breach of contract claim against government, and
2) farmer had received remedy contemplated by agreement's enforcement provision by bringing action in district court and, thus, farmer failed to state requisite damages to support breach of contract claim.
Pueblo of Isleta v. Michelle Lujan Grisham
2019 WL 1429586
No. 17-654 KG/KK
Legal Topics: Gaming - Revenue Sharing
Related News: Judge rules for pueblos in revenue dispute with state (Santa Fe New Mexican) 4/1/19
Peggy Fontenot v. Mike Hunter
2019 WL 1413760
No. CIV-16-1339-G
Legal Topics: Oklahoma’s American Indian Arts and Crafts Sales Act
Related News: Cherokee Nation not happy with ruling on 'Native American' art (Tahlequah Daily Press) 4/4/19, Judge rejects state's effort to restrict Native art (Muskogee Phoenix) 4/1/19
City of Council Bluffs, Iowa v. United States Department of Interior
2019 WL 1368561
No. 1:17-CV-00033-SMR-CFB
United States District Court, S.D. Iowa, Western Division.
*Synopsis: City in state of Iowa filed suit against Department of Interior and National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC), asserting claims under Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and seeking declaratory judgment invalidating NIGC's amended final order approving site-specific gaming ordinance enacted by Ponca Tribe of Nebraska that allowed tribe to conduct Class II gaming, under Indian Gaming Regulation Act (IGRA), on 4.8-acre tract of land in Iowa that was within tribe's service area, designated pursuant to Ponca Restoration Act (PRA) that restored tribe's government-to-government relationship with United States, and that was subsequently placed into trust by Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), as authorized by Indian Reorganization Act (IRA). State of Nebraska and State of Iowa intervened as intervenor-plaintiffs. Parties cross-moved for summary judgment.
*Holdings: The District Court, Stephanie M. Rose, J., held that:
1) NIGC appropriately found tribe was not estopped from asserting that parcel qualified for IGRA's restored lands exception;
2) NIGC reasonably interpreted PRA;
3) NIGC was not required to consider new IGRA regulations in interpreting PRA;
4) NIGC reasonably determined that new IGRA regulations did not apply; but
5) NIGC unreasonably failed to consider purported verbal agreement between tribe and Iowa.
Plaintiffs' motion granted in part and denied in part; defendants' motion denied.
Related News: Ponca Tribe wins crucial backing for Prairie Flower Casino in 12-year legal battle with Iowa, Nebraska (Casino.org) 5/3/19
Yselta Del Sur Pueblo v. City of El Paso
2018 WL 7133707
EP-17-CV-00162-DCG
Legal Topics: Tribal Real Property
2019 WL 1314921
No. 3:18cv48
*Synopsis: Borrowers who entered into loan agreements with two lending companies owned by two Native American tribes brought putative class action against two investment companies and their owner, alleging that although the tribes nominally owned the lending companies, they were actually funded and operated by the defendants, who used the tribe's ownership status to make usurious loans, in violation of Virginia laws and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”). Defendants filed motion to transfer or to stay proceedings, motion to compel arbitration, and motion to dismiss.
*Holdings: The District Court, M. Hannah Lauck, J., held that:
1) first-to-file rule did not apply to warrant transfer to federal court in Vermont, where a similar action had previously been filed;
2) even if the rule applied, special circumstances existed to warrant allowing the case to proceed in Virginia;
3) arbitration agreements within the loan agreements sought to prospectively exclude the application of federal law, and therefore, were unenforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA);
4) borrowers stated a claim against defendants for violation of Virginia's usury laws;
5) borrowers stated claims under RICO; and
6) borrowers stated unjust enrichment claim under Virginia law.
2019 WL 1294834
NO. C70-9213RSM
Legal Topics: Fishing Rights - Usual and Customary Areas
Cayuga Nation v. Bernhardt
2019 WL 1130445
No. 17-1923 (CKK)
*Synopsis: Faction of Indian nation sought review of decision of Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and Department of the Interior (DOI) recognizing another faction as nation's governing body. Parties moved for summary judgment.
*Holdings: The District Court, Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, J., held that:
1) review by Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs was adequate;
2) determination that statement of support (SOS) was a valid mechanism for selecting members of governing council was not contrary to nation's law;
3) BIA and DOI adequately explained their change in policy relating to use of SOS campaign to select members of council;
4) BIA and DOI adequately accounted for expert evidence; and
5) challengers were not deprived of neutral decision maker.
Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment denied; defendants' motions for summary judgment granted.
2019 WL 1128359
No. CIV 12-0800 JB\JHR
Legal Topics: Aboriginal Title
Blue Lake Rancheria Economic Development Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
Nos. 16150-17L, 16189-17L
*Synopsis: Corporation of federally recognized Indian Tribe, and corporation's division, petitioned separately for review of IRS determinations to proceed with liens to collect unpaid employment taxes arising from division's business operations. Actions were consolidated.
*Holdings: The Tax Court, Goeke, J., held that:
1) IRS notices of determination to sustain tax liens were sufficient to provide Tax Court with jurisdiction;
2) state law did not restrict Indian tribal corporation's power, pursuant to charter issued by Department of Interior (DOI) under Indian Reorganization Act (IRA), to create legally distinct corporate division whose federal employment tax liabilities were not collectible from corporation by IRS;
3) Indian tribal corporation's power to create legally distinct corporate division was within scope of Indian Reorganization Act (IRA); and
4) Indian tribal corporation's division acted as legally distinct entity, and thus IRS could not collect division's employment tax liabilities from corporation.
*Synopsis: Litigation trustee brought strong-arm proceeding to avoid allegedly fraudulent transfers, and Indian tribe named as defendant moved to dismiss on sovereign immunity grounds. The United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Walter Shapero, J., 516 B.R. 462, denied the motion, and Indian tribe appealed. The District Court, Paul D. Borman, J., 532 B.R. 680, reversed and remanded. On remand, the Bankruptcy Court, Shapero, J., 559 B.R. 842, granted motion to dismiss, and litigation trustee appealed. The District Court, Borman, J., 584 B.R. 706, affirmed. Appeal was taken.
*Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Clay, Circuit Judge, held that:
1) Congress did not unequivocally express intent to abrogate Indian tribe's sovereign immunity from cause of action by litigation trustee in strong-arm capacity to set aside allegedly fraudulent prepetition transfers made by Chapter 11 debtor to tribe;
2) while tribal sovereign immunity could be waived by litigation conduct, it could not be waived by the litigation conduct, not of tribe, but of tribe’s alleged alter ego or agent; and
3) litigation conduct of filing bankruptcy petition does not waive tribal sovereign immunity as to a separate, adversarial fraudulent transfer avoidance claim.
Related News: Federal Appeals Court Affirms Tribal Immunity from Bankruptcy Code (JDSupra) 3/1/19
Stanko v. Oglala Sioux Tribe
2019 WL 846573
No. 17-3176
*Synopsis: An arrestee who was not a member of an Indian tribe brought § 1983 action against a federally recognized tribe, the Oglala Sioux Tribe, and various tribal officers, seeking damages for violation of the plaintiff's constitutional and civil rights in connection with allegations that the arrestee was traveling on a federally-maintained highway on reservation land was when he was arrested, detained, assaulted, battered, and robbed. The United States District Court for the District of South Dakota, Jeffrey L. Viken, Chief District Judge, 2017 WL 4217113, granted defendants' motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Arrestee appealed.
1) arrestee did not state an Indian Civil Rights Act (ICRA) claim, and
2) arrestee failed to exhaust available tribal court remedies.
*Synopsis: Petitions for review were filed challenging Federal Communications Commission (FCC) order limiting enhanced tribal telecommunications support to service provided using tribal facilities, and to low-income consumers living on rural areas of tribal lands.
*Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Rogers, Circuit Judge, held that:
1) FCC action in changing its policy to limit enhanced tribal telecommunications subsidy to service provided using tribal facilities was arbitrary and capricious;
2) FCC action in changing its policy to limit enhanced tribal telecommunications subsidy to service provided to low-income consumers living on rural areas of tribal lands was arbitrary and capricious;
3) FCC's notice was insufficient under Administrative Procedure Act's (APA) requirements for notice-and-comment rulemaking; and
4) FCC improperly made substantive changes to its former policy without commencing new notice-and-comment-rulemaking proceeding.
Petitions granted, order vacated, and matter remanded.
*Synopsis: Property owner filed suit against United States, seeking determination as to property rights of non-tribal property owners abutting shore of lake that was within national park and was navigable waterway abutting Quinault Indian Reservation and determination of public's right to access lake, its shore, and lake bed. Quinault Indian Nation moved for leave to appear as amicus curiae.
*Holdings: The Court of Federal Claims, Campbell-Smith, J., held that amicus brief would not be useful at motion to dismiss stage of proceeding.
Brisbois v. Tulalip Tribal Court
2019 WL 1522540
NO. 2:18-cv-01677-TSZ-BAT
Legal Topics: Indian Civil Rights Act; Writ of Habeas Corpus Motion denied.
2019 WL 639971
EP-17-CV-179-PRM
Legal Topics: Tribal Gaming - State Regulation
First Interstate Bancsystem, INC. v. First Interstate Bank
2019 WL 498733
CV 19-10-BLG-SPW
Legal Topics: Clean Water Act
Swinomish Indian Tribal Community v. Army Corps of Engineers
2019 WL 469842
No. 2:18-CV-598-RSL
Legal Topics: Eelgrass Beds; Sustainable Fisheries and Shellfish
Mandan, Hidatsa and Arikara Nation v. United States Department of the Interior
No. 18-cv-1462 (CRC)
*Synopsis: Indian tribe brought action under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) against United States Department of the Interior and its secretary, challenging Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) approval of permits to drill horizontal oil and gas wells underneath lake on well pad located on non-Indian privately-owned fee land within Indian reservation. After exploration company intervened, defendants and company moved to transfer venue.
*Holdings: The District Court, Christopher R. Cooper, J., held that:
1) public interest in having local controversies decided locally weighed in favor of transfer;
2) transferee forum's familiarity with governing law weighed in favor of transfer;
3) relative congestion of court dockets weighed slightly against transfer;
4) tribe's choice of forum was entitled to less deference; and
5) exploration company's choice of forum weighed in favor of transfer.
United States of America v. Jack W. Turtle
2019 WL 423346
NO: 2:18-cr-88-FtM-38MRM
United States District Court, M.D. Florida.
*Synopsis: Defendant, a member of the Seminole Tribe of Florida who lived on a Seminole Indian reservation, was charged with selling American alligator eggs in violation of Lacey Act, predicated on the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Defendant moved to dismiss.
*Holdings: The District Court, Sheri Polster Chappell, J., held that:
1) the Tribe's usufructuary rights included the right to sell alligator eggs gathered from the reservation;
2) ESA did not abrogate the Tribe's usufructuary right to sell alligator eggs; but
3) Congress could regulate the Tribe's usufructuary rights with reasonable and necessary conservation measures.
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians v. Riverside County
Legal Topics: Indian Trust Lands - Possessory Interest Tax
Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians v. Washington
2019 WL 274040
No. 17-35722
*Synopsis: Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians brought action against State of Washington and the Attorney General of Washington, seeking a declaration that its tribal sovereign immunity barred any lawsuit for indemnification arising from a contract with the State of Washington concerning construction of a revetment to protect salmon populations in a river on tribal lands following a landslide near the river. The United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, Robert J. Bryan, Senior District Judge, 2017 WL 3424942, granted tribe's summary judgment motion. Defendants appealed.
*Holdings: The Court of Appeals, McKeown, Circuit Judge, held that under the well-pleaded complaint rule, district court lacked federal question jurisdiction over declaratory judgment action that was based on existence of a tribal immunity defense.
2019 WL 150627
*Synopsis: Native American landowners brought trespass action against owner and operator of network of natural gas transmission pipelines The United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma, No. 5:15-CV-01262-M, Vicki Miles–LaGrange, J., 247 F.Supp.3d 1233, granted summary judgment to plaintiffs and entered permanent injunction requiring removal of pipeline. Defendant appealed.
*Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Tymkovich, Chief Judge, held that:
1) consent of minority of allottees did not form complete defense to remaining allottees' federal trespass claim;
2) expiration of easement permitting natural gas pipeline across allotted tribal land created duty on part of pipeline's owner to remove pipeline; and
3)district court was required to apply federal courts' traditional equity jurisprudence, rather than simplified injunction rule from Oklahoma law, in determining whether to grant injunctive relief.
United States v. Eagle Pipe
2019 WL 117120
No. 17-3039
*Synopsis: Defendant was convicted following guilty plea in the United States District Court for the District of South Dakota, Charles B. Kornmann, J., of domestic assault by an habitual offender, and was sentenced to 45 months' imprisonment. Defendant appealed.
1) upward departure from sentencing guidelines was warranted to account for tribal offenses, and
2) sentence of 45 months' imprisonment, which included upward departure for underrepresented criminal history, was not procedurally unreasonable.
2019 WL 687882
*Synopsis: American Indian tribe brought action against Michigan state and municipal officials for failure to recognize reservation land. Government moved for judgment on the pleadings.
*Holdings: The District Court, Paul L. Maloney, J., held that:
1) tribe was not judicially estopped from claiming interest in reservation land;
2) prior proceeding before Indian Claims Commission did not collaterally estop tribe from claiming interest in reservation land; and
3) tribe's claims were not barred by Indian Claims Commission Act.
Winnemucca Indian Colony v. United States of America, Department of the Interior
2019 WL 320560
3:11-cv-00622-RCJ-CBC
Legal Topics: Attorneys' Fees; Equal Access to Justice Act
United States of America v. Merle Denezpi
No. 18-cr-00267-REB-JMC
Legal Topics: Double Jeopardy
Koi Nation of Northern California v. United States of the Interior
2019 WL 250670
No. 17-1718 (BAH)
*Synopsis: The Koi Nation of Northern California, which was a landless federally recognized Indian tribe, brought action alleging that United States Department of the Interior's (DOI) decision concluding that the tribe was not eligible to game on lands under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) restored lands exception violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), IGRA, and Indian Reorganization Act (IRA), and challenging the subsection of the regulation on which the DOI's decision relied, seeking declaration that tribe qualified as an Indian tribe restored to federal recognition under IGRA, and injunction invalidating subsection of implementing regulation to extent it excluded from eligibility for IGRA's restored lands exception tribes administratively determined to be recognized outside the formal Part 83 Federal acknowledgement process. Koi Nation and DOI cross-moved for summary judgment.
*Holdings: The District Court, Beryl A. Howell, Chief Judge, held that:
1) tribe's claim was ripe for judicial review;
2) statutory six-year limitations period for challenging agency regulation did not apply to tribe's claim challenging DOI regulation;
3) tribe was “restored to Federal recognition,” within meaning of IGRA's restored lands exception;
4) even if IGRA's restored lands exception was ambiguous, Indian canon of construction would resolve the ambiguity in tribe's favor;
5) DOI decision violated statute prohibiting classifying, enhancing, or diminishing privileges and immunities available to Indian tribe relative to other federally recognized tribes; and
6) DOI failed to adequately explain its change in policy.
Koi Nation's motion granted; DOI's motion denied.
2019 WL 121210
No. 18-891 (CKK)
Legal Topics: Tribal Membership
Barron v. Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium
2019 WL 80889
No. 3:18-cv-00118-SLG
*Synopsis: Former employee brought § 1981 action in state court against employer, an Alaska Native tribal health consortium, alleging disparate treatment and retaliation on the basis of race. After removal, employer moved to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
*Holdings: The District Court, Sharon L. Gleason, J., held that:
1) employer was an arm of Alaska's tribes with tribal sovereign immunity, and
2) as a matter of first impression, Congress did not abrogate tribal sovereign immunity as to § 1981 claims.