Document: 532 U.S. 411121 S.Ct. 1589149 L.Ed.2d 623 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of United States Reports. Readers are requested notify Reporter Decisions, Supreme Court States, Washington, D. C. 20543, any typographical or other errors, order that corrections may be made goes press.C & L ENTERPRISES, INC., PETITIONERSv.CITIZEN BAND POTAWATOMI INDIAN TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA No. 00-292. SUPREME COURT THE UNITED STATES Argued March 19, 2001 Decided April 30, Syllabus Respondent, a federally recognized Indian Tribe, proposed and entered into standard form construction contract with petitioner C Enterprises, Inc. (C L), for installation roof on Tribe-owned commercial building Oklahoma. The property question lies outside Tribe's reservation not held by Federal Government trust Tribe. contains two key provisions. First, clause provides "[a]ll ... disputes arising out Contract shall decided arbitration accordance Construction Industry Arbitration Rules American Association . award rendered arbitrator final, judgment upon it applicable law court having jurisdiction thereof." referenced provide: "Parties these rules deemed have consented federal state Second, includes choice-of-law reads: "The governed place where Project located." Oklahoma has adopted Uniform Act, which instructs "[t]he making an agreement providing this confers enforce under act enter thereunder." Act defines "court" as "any competent state." After execution but commenced performance, Tribe change roofing material specified contract. solicited new bids retained another company install roof. L, claiming had dishonored contract, submitted demand. asserted sovereign immunity declined participate proceeding. It notified arbitrator, however, several substantive defenses L's claim. received evidence favor L. contractor filed suit District County, general, first instance, jurisdiction. appeared limited purpose moving dismiss action ground that, sovereign, was immune from suit. denied motion confirming award. Civil Appeals affirmed. While certiorari petition pending here, Kiowa Okla. v. Manufacturing Technologies, Inc., 523 751, holding tribe court-even breach involving off-reservation conduct-unless "Congress authorized waived its immunity," id., at 754, 760. On remand reconsideration light Kiowa, here Although noting language judicial enforcement seem indicate willingness expose itself concluded requisite clarity. therefore instructed trial case. Held: By clear import clause, amenable state-court arbitral Like case arises commercial, does contend Congress abrogated tribal setting. presented whether immunity. To relinquish immunity, tribe's waiver must "clear." Tax Comm'n Citizen Band Potawatomi Okla., 498 505, 509. contract's provision related prescriptions lead conclusion requires resolution all contract-related between parties binding arbitration; ensuing awards reduced "in For governance proceedings, specifies Rules, "the makes plain enough "court jurisdiction" selecting ("the located") govern effectively confirmation with" prescribes when "an provid[es] in" Oklahoma, vests sensible reading local general jurisdiction, fits statutory description. rejects contention suit, simply parties' rights contractual disputes. Under recognizes, arbitrate. no doubt memorializes commitment adhere dispute regime. That regime real world objective; designed regulation game lacking practical consequences. And end, specifically authorizes arrived through arbitration. Also rejected assertion principally private who waive, cannot establish In appropriate cases, applies common-law rule interpretation should construe ambiguous against interest party drafted it. inapposite evident reasons. ambiguous. did find short end adhesion stick: prepared contract; foisted Pp. 5-11. Reversed remanded. ON WRIT CERTIORARI TO CIVIL APPEALS OKLAHOMA, SECOND DIVISION Ginsburg, J., delivered unanimous Court. Opinion Justice Ginsburg 1 751 (1998), immunity." Id., 754. concerns impact plea document centers signed foam building, First Bank, Shawnee, land owned Nation (Tribe). off-reservation, nontrust property. accepted contractor, clause. 2 expressly agreed arbitrate relating law, We hold 3 * Respondent 1993, housed 4 issue copyrighted Institute Architects. details set were inserted architect. Two provisions clause: 5 "All claims Contractor [C L] Owner [the Tribe] Contract, thereof, [I]ndustry currently effect unless mutually agree otherwise arbitrators App. Pet. Cert. 46. 6 refers Association, Dispute Resolution Procedures, R-48(c) (Sept. 1, 2000). 7 56. Stat., Tit. 15, 802.B (1993). Ibid. 8 (the contract) rubber guard. consideration evidence, $25,400 damages (close 30% price), plus attorney's fees costs. 9 Several weeks later, specially 10 affirmed, lacked because giving rise "between non-Indian" "executed Country." 14 (citation omitted). review, petitioned 11 holding: "Tribes enjoy suits contracts, those contracts involve governmental activities they off reservation." U.S., reconfirmed: "[A]n only Thereafter, we granted case, vacated Appeals, remanded Kiowa. 524 901 (1998). 12 remand, changed course. despite matter. 4-5. then addressed [the] arbitration, regarding courts jurisdiction," observed, "seem part contract." 7. But, quickly added, leap one based implication, unequivocal expression." Concluding clarity, appeals review. 13 Conflicting Appeals' current decision, kin now us, waives See Sokaogon Gaming Enterprise Corp. Tushie-Montgomery Associates, 86 F.3d 656, 661 (CA7 1996) (clause requiring authorizing entry thereof" immunity); Native Village Eyak GC Contractors, 658 P.2d 756 (Alaska 1983) (same); Val/Del, Superior Court, 145 Ariz. 558, 703 502 (Ct. 1985) (same). But cf. Pan Co. Sycuan Mission Indians, 884 F.2d 416 (CA9 1989) waive immunity). resolve conflict, 531 956 (2000), reverse. II reaffirmed doctrine involved (a stock purchase) promissory note agreeing pay seller $285,000 interest. recited: "Nothing Note subjects limits Oklahoma." 753-754. defaulted, sued court, upheld plea. Tribal ruled extends contracts. 754-760. defaulting note, held, ha[d] Tribe's] nor it." 15 petitioning 16 abrogate "unequivocally" express purpose. Santa Clara Pueblo Martinez, 436 49, 58 (1978) (citing Testen, 424 392, 399 (1976)). Similarly, 509 (1991). satisfied waived, brought 17 us conclusion. industry, ibid., thereof," 18 56, id. 46 ("judgment award] law"); 802.A (1993) ("This apply written submit controversy thereafter parties.").1 19 force state," i.e., 802.B. description.2 20 sum, agreed, certain procedures. fact, tendered calling subscribed Act. correspondingly designates forums "court[s] [Oklahoma]." selected just such forum. essentially indistinguishable Seventh Circuit stated: 21 "There nothing about th[e] [of clause]. agrees bound award, submission enforced law. 22 23 [tribal immunity] implicit rather than explicit if explicit, use words 'sovereign immunity.' No ever that." Sokaogon, F.3d, 659-660. 24 cogent observation holds well confront.3 25 strenuously urges, "is suit." Brief 13. phrase maintains, "begs what jurisdiction." 22. As counsel clarified oral argument, answer "no court," earth even moon. Tr. Oral Arg. 32-33. court-federal, state, tribal-has over insists, Ibid.; 660 (facing similar gleaned meant statement will do: assert defense contract.").4 26 Instead waiving argues, disputes; instead ("An is: submitting arbitration."). Eyak, P.2d, 760 ("[W]e believe resolved intends immunity... would meaningless constitute whatever possessed."); Ariz., 565, (because "agree[d] arbitrated result there immunity"); Rosebud Sioux Val-U Constr. Co., 50 560, 562 (CA8 1995) (agreement contain enforcement; nonetheless observed "disputes could intended defense").5 27 also asserts 20; 27-28. Mastrobuono Shearson Lehman Hutton, 514 52, 62 (1995) (construing containing clause). rule, here. explained, Nor quiescent Cf. Bankers Ins. __ __, 00-1342, WL 293669, *3 (CA4, Mar. 27, 2001) (where agency agreement, including provision, shield engaging process).6 28 29 reasons stated, conclude signed, clearly court; thereby reversed, further proceedings inconsistent opinion. 30 so ordered. Notes amicus supporting urges remain within "four corners contract" refrain reliance "secondary sources." Amicus Curiae n. secondary interpretive aides supplement our incorporated terms itself. argues inapplicable reach arbitrations properly explicitly "provide[s] 47-48 (referring 802.B). authority cited constricted "appl[ies] parties." 802.A. decline attribute lawmakers interpreters severely shrinks Act's domain. Instructive governing waivers foreign sovereigns. 759 (1998) ("In considering Congress' role reforming instructive problems countries."). "Under pursuant ." Restatement (Third) Foreign Relations Law 456(2)(b)(ii) (1987). Relying jurisprudence, maintains "courts especially reluctant expressions consent court." 23; see (arguing State's generalized without selection forum proceed, "should construed narrowly own subjected sovereign's courts") (citing, e.g., Kennecott Copper State Comm'n, 327 573 (1946) (State statute court)). explained supra, 6-7, plainly court. occasion decide parallel principles apparent concession-that embodies arbitration-is altogether consistent refusal proceedings. alternatively affirmance grounds void U.S.C. 81 members executed do behalf. These issues aired scope questions address them.

Category: 1