Your query indian or (native and american) or tribe
returned 4420 results.
Your search has returned a large number of results. You might want to
consider using additional terms to narrow it.
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs were Michael B. With him on the briefs were David S. With them on the briefs were Lois Schiffer. With her on the brief were Wil liam W. Petitioners' principal contention is that EPA has granted too much authority to tribes. The first is whether Congress expressly delegated to Native American nations authority to regulate air quality on all land within reservations. Including fee land held by private land owners who are not tribe members. The second is whether EPA has properly construed
OPINION/ORDER
He was denied entry. The Kamehameha Schools were created through a charitable testamentary trust. Plaintiff argues that he was denied admission because of his race in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981. Factual Background Historical Context2 The islands of Hawaii are geographically isolated in the South Pacific Ocean and were originally settled sometime between 1 and 750 A.D. The immediate result of that first encounter was that Native Hawaiians were introduced to Western goods and Western diseases. The first treaty was signed in 1826. Additional treaties were signed in 1849. Was commercially desirable. Western economic domination of the Hawaiian Islands was followed by an interest in establishing political control. Was overthrown by a small group of nonHawaiians. Who were assisted in their efforts by the United States Minister. Laws were then enacted suppressing the Hawaiian culture and language and allowing for the displacement of Native Hawaiians from their lands. The Hawaiian language was banned as a medium of instruction in schools.
OPINION/ORDER
We have jurisdiction to determine whether the regulations are unconstitutional. There is no universally recognized legal definition of the phrase. The significance of the question is immediately apparent from the text of the Indian Commerce Clause of the United 15208 KAHAWAIOLAA v. Much of the theory that underpins Indian law is that the Indian tribes possessed certain sovereign rights based on their existence as distinct political entities exercising authority over their members prior to the incorporation of their territory into the United States. As far as the federal government is concerned. Which was intended in part to permit the tribes to set up legal structures designed to aid in self government. A group would need to adopt an appropriate conThis is not to say. The organization was required to be approved by the Secretary of the Department of Interior. Ninety nine tribes were organized. Nintey six were excluded. Acknowledgment under these regulations is a prerequisite for certain federal services and benefits.
OPINION/ORDER
2004 is amended so that footnote 20 should read: In so holding. We necessarily determine that no reasonable person could conclude on this record that Kennewick Man is
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: This is a case about the ancient human remains of a man who hunted and lived. A time so ancient that the pristine and untouched land and the primitive cultures that may have lived on it are not deeply understood by even the most well informed men and women of our age. The discovery that launched this contest was that of a human skeleton.
Jr. were convicted for unrelated counts of illegally possessing eagle feathers in violation of sections 703 and 668(a) of Title 16 of the United States Code. Was not criminally prosecuted.
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: Mary Doe1 challenges the State of California's jurisdiction Pseudonyms are used to identify the mother. Who was domiciled on the Elem Indian Colony reservation at the time she was removed from Mary Doe's custody by the Lake County Department of Social Services. Which was passed in 1978 to ensure the tribes a role in adjudicating child custody proceedings involving Indian children. Codified at 25 U.S.C. §§ 1901 1963.2 ICWA provides that tribes will have exclusive jurisdiction over child custody proceedings involving Indian children domiciled or residing on the reservation
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: The issue for decision is whether the Hoopa Valley Indian Tribe (Tribe) has authority to regulate logging by a nonIndian on fee land that she owns. Congress determined that
OPINION/ORDER
The jury unanimously returned a recommendation of a sentence of death as to each of the two victims who were murdered. They were picked up by a trucker who took them part of the way. It is a 35 minute drive that the two made in Slim's pewter colored double cab Sierra GMC pickup truck. Denison was unable to assist her. That is the last time they were seen alive. Slim and Jane were in front. Her body was pulled onto the rear seat. Jane was put next to her. Slim's body was dragged out. Jane was ordered out of the truck and told by Mitchell
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: The issue for decision is whether the Hoopa Valley Indian Tribe (Tribe) has authority to regulate logging by a nonIndian on fee land that she owns. Congress determined that
OPINION/ORDER
Was on brief. Was on brief. Were on brief. Were on brief. Were on brief. Were on brief. Was on brief. Were on brief. Background
The Narragansetts were aboriginal inhabitants of what is now Rhode Island.
That the Act is enforced in a discriminatory fashion in violation of his equal protection rights. Hardman is not of Native American descent. His ex wife and two children are. His ex wife and children are enrolled members of the S'Kallum Tribe. Hardman was still married to and living with his ex wife. He was informed that he would not be allowed to apply as he was not a member of a federally recognized tribe.
Years later. Hardman and his wife were separated. Ute tribal officers were informed by Mr. Officer Murray was a cross commissioned federal law enforcement officer acting under the authority of the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs. Which were hanging from the rear view mirror of his truck.
On March 10. Hardman was issued a federal violation notice for possessing golden eagle feathers without a permit in violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. A bench trial was held before a magistrate judge. Hardman was found guilty of violating the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and sentenced to pay a small fine.
OPINION/ORDER
Bruce asserts that the case against her was brought under the wrong statute. Bruce contends that she is an Indian. The government should have charged her under 18 U.S.C. § 1153. We further hold that the court's error was not harmless. Alleged that the victim was an Indian person. Bruce repeatedly argued that she was Indian. She moved to dismiss the indictment on the ground that it should have been brought under 18 U.S.C. § 1153. Bruce's only defense was her claim of Indian status. Bruce introduced evidence that she is one eighth Chippewa. That her mother is an enrolled member of the Turtle Mountain Tribe of Oklahoma. That she was born on an Indian Reservation. That two of her children are enrolled members of an Indian tribe. That whenever she was arrested it
OPINION/ORDER
Should form the continuation of the paragraph that currently is at page 6. Were on brief for appellant Penobscot Indian Nation and third party defendants appellees. Were on brief for appellee and cross appellant Key Bank of Maine. Were on brief for appellee Michael Marcello. Taintor & Abbott was on brief for defendants appellees and cross appellants. P.A. was on brief for defendant appellee and cross appellant. Hewey with whom Drummond Woodsum & MacMahon was on brief for appellees Consumers Water Company. It is not apparent from the record that the results of the investigation were set out in writing or were made known to the public. It is clear. The complaint alleged that the two Settlement Agreements signed by PIN and the Appellees were void because they did not receive the Secretary of the Interior's approval pursuant to 25 U.S.C. Together with the affidavits . . . show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.
Appellants are the federal agencies and officials who threatened to prosecute three Native American tribes for use of a device called the Magical Irish Instant Bingo Dispenser System. Which we will call
OPINION/ORDER
Is hereby withdrawn and the amended opinion is substituted in its place. The opinion is amended in Part IV. IT IS SO ORDERED. Darrell
Judge BRISCOE is filing a concurring opinion. Judge LUCERO is filing a concurring opinion by which he joins Parts I. These actions were challenged by the instant declaratory judgment and injunction suit brought by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the Board) and Local Union No. 1385 of the Western Council of Industrial Workers (the Union) as an intervenor. The Board and the intervening Union brought this appeal from the district court's decision granting summary judgment in favor of the Pueblo.
I
The relevant facts are undisputed. San Juan Pueblo is a federally recognized Indian tribe located in New Mexico. 200 members live on tribal lands that are held in trust by the United States for the Pueblo. The Pueblo is governed by a tribal council. Which is vested with legislative authority over tribal lands. Is described in the District Court's opinion. NLRB v. The ordinance in substance is a so called
The district court dismissed the case because it found that the Tribe was entitled to the sovereign immunity accorded Native American tribes. Additionally that the Tribe waived whatever immunity it may have had by accepting federal funds.
The district court dismissed the case because it found that the Tribe was entitled to the sovereign immunity accorded Native American tribes. Additionally that the Tribe waived whatever immunity it may have had by accepting federal funds.
OPINION/ORDER
Before the court are several appeals from judgments concerning lands once recognized to be part of the Yankton Sioux Reservation. That case was remanded for further proceedings.1 In the district court the case was then consolidated with an Individually. The district court concluded that the reservation has not been disestablished and still includes all land within the original exterior reservation boundaries that was not ceded to the United States. The individual named state and county officials appeal.2 We affirm the conclusion that the reservation was never clearly disestablished. We reverse the conclusion that the original exterior boundaries of the reservation continue to have effect and that all nonceded lands remain part of the reservation. I. The original boundaries of the Yankton Sioux Reservation were defined in a treaty between the United States and the Yankton Sioux Tribe on April 19. 000 acres in what is now Charles The named defendants in the declaratory judgment action were Matt Gaffey. South Dakota.3 The Supreme Court held in Yankton that the reservation was diminished by land ceded to the United States under an 1892 agreement.
OPINION/ORDER
The Samish argued that federal recognition1 of their tribe in 1996 was an extraordinary circumstance that justified reexamining their treaty fishing rights. Holding that federal recognition is of limited relevance to the Samish's treaty fishing rights. That the 1979 judgment was not erroneous. The United States brought the action
OPINION/ORDER
Plaintiffs' homes were built with wood foundations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The MHHO Program was designed to These facts. Are taken from Plaintiffs' complaint. Which is presumed true for purposes of this Rule 12(b)(6) proceeding. The families were required to contribute land. Each family was required to make monthly payments in an amount calibrated to their income. The homebuyers were made responsible for maintenance of the house. When the program was formalized in the Indian Housing Act of 1988. The Blackfeet Housing Authority was charged with
Is responsible for . Us is whether the State of Kansas may impose its . Within the State.
I.
The facts underlying this case are not in dispute. The Tribes are the beneficial owners of trust lands within the State of Kansas. The stations are located along or near Kansas state . 79 3408(d)(1) (1999 Supp.)] exempts any fuel transactions where the fuel is exported
OPINION/ORDER
The threshold question is whether the Tribe is immune from suit. We conclude that it is not. We next address whether the Tribe is subject to the ADEA in these circumstances. We 10714 conclude that it is not. Resolution of this issue is a pure question of law that is currently ripe for review and. Is best resolved at the subpoena enforcement stage. The Tribe does not have its own reservation but instead occupies land held in trust by the United States. Is a governmental arm of the Tribe. Was particularly concerned with
OPINION/ORDER
The threshold question is whether the Tribe is immune from suit. We conclude that it is not. We next address whether the Tribe is subject to the ADEA in these circumstances. We 10714 conclude that it is not. Resolution of this issue is a pure question of law that is currently ripe for review and. Is best resolved at the subpoena enforcement stage. The Tribe does not have its own reservation but instead occupies land held in trust by the United States. Is a governmental arm of the Tribe. Was particularly concerned with
OPINION/ORDER
Vacate the district court's determination that the lottery itself is illegal under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA). We conclude that AT&T was not the proper party to challenge the legality of the lottery. An off Reservation winner receives a credit to his or her account that is redeemable in person or through the mail. This aspect of the Lottery is subject to litigation in the Eighth Circuit and the Missouri state courts. The Eighth Circuit has remanded to the district court to determine whether the Lottery is a gaming activity on Indian lands subject to IGRA. The parties have returned to the Missouri state court. From which the case was originally removed. 2 The only relevant compact provision states:
OPINION/ORDER
Is amended as follows: On page 4421 of the slip opinion. Delete the sentence beginning
OPINION/ORDER
Was not valid as applied to 1 No. 05 1952 Keweenaw Bay Indian Cmty. v. The suit was in response to Defendants' attempts to assess. Count I alleged that Plaintiff was entitled to declaratory and injunctive relief because Congress had not clearly authorized state taxation of the real property at issue. Count II alleged that Plaintiff was entitled to declaratory and injunctive relief because application of the Act would violate the terms of the 1854 Treaty. Entered a declaratory judgment that the Act was not valid as applied to the real property at issue. The Parties Plaintiff is a federally recognized American Indian tribe and is the successor in interest of the L'Anse and Ontonagon bands of Chippewa Indians. Defendant Robert Naftaly is the chairperson of the Michigan State Tax Commission (
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the brief were William R. With her on the brief were Thomas L. Of counsel on the brief was Jason Roberts. Are not money mandating for purposes of the Samish claims. These claims are not within the trial court's Tucker Act or Indian Tucker Act jurisdiction. That the Samish claims to federal benefits for the 1969 to 1996 period are not time barred. We therefore reverse the dismissal of count two on limitations grounds and remand for further proceedings to determine whether the remaining statutes underlying the claim are money mandating. That but for federal misconduct they would have received federal benefits since 1969. The counterfactual that they would otherwise have been acknowledged is the first element to their claims for benefits between 1969 and 1996. For thirty three years the Samish have. More generally concerning the justiciability of federal recognition. 04 5042 2 Federal recognition or acknowledgement is a prerequisite to an Indian tribe's right to claim benefits under federal statutes. 25 C.F.R. § 83.2 (2005).
OPINION/ORDER
The Kamehameha Schools have operated as the charitable legacy of Princess Bernice Pauahi Bishop. The Kamehameha Schools give preference to students who are of native Hawaiian ancestry. Attendance at the Kamehameha Schools is effectively limited to those descended from the Hawaiian race. The issue considered here is a significant one in our statutory civil rights law: May a private. Purposefully exclude a student qualified for admission solely because he is not of pure or part aboriginal blood? The parties agree that this is a case of first impression in our circuit. He argues that he was denied entry to the Kamehameha Schools because of his race in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981. I The facts are not in dispute. Nonsectarian schools which are dispersed among the Hawaiian Islands. KAMEHAMEHA SCHOOLS 8927 The school system was founded in 1887 under a
OPINION/ORDER
I. Gaming Corp. and Golden Nickel (the management companies) are Minnesota corporations involved in the management of gambling casinos. They have overlapping ownership and at one point agreed to merge. some time. The Ho Chunk Nation is a recognized Native American tribe in The Dorsey is a large Minnesota law firm which actively represented Gaming Corp. for Wisconsin and was known as the Wisconsin Winnebago Tribe until 1994. nation decided to open a casino and negotiated a tribal state compact with the state of Wisconsin in 1992 as required by IGRA to allow it to conduct casino gaming. The nation desired to have Dorsey represent it during the process of developing the casino. Golden Nickel was to provide financing for the construction and to maintain at all times a valid license from the Winnebago Gaming Commission. Which was valid until the end of that year. companies merged as they proposed. operating. The management companies apparently planned to merge if both applications were Dorsey assisted the tribal gaming commission in assessing the applications and was in charge of presenting evidence at several commission hearings held from December 1993 through May 1994.
The Secretary of the Interior to promulgate regulations which authorize takings or possession of these eagles when such possession is compatible with eagle preservation and
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs were Lauren E. With her on the brief were John C. Grant was on the brief for intervenor Navajo Nation. In proposing to promulgate and administer a federal 1 The following petitions for review challenging the same EPA rule were consolidated and are before us: State of Michigan. Was voluntarily dismissed without prejudice on Septem ber 14. 2000. operating permits program for areas where EPA believes the Indian country status is in question. Among the requirements is that the state demonstrate that it has
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: The question presented in this case is whether a non Indian plaintiff consents to the civil jurisdiction of a tribal court by SMITH v. SALISH KOOTENAI COLLEGE 107 filing claims against an Indian defendant arising out of activities within the reservation where the defendant is located. Who is not a member of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes (
(2) the Secretary was not required to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act or the National Historical Preservation Act before acquiring land pursuant to Pub. L. 98 602 because the exercise of the Secretary's duty to acquire the land was nondiscretionary. L. 98 602 funds were used to acquire the tract of land in downtown Kansas City. L. 98 602 funds were used for the acquisition.
I.
The underlying facts of this case are largely uncontroverted. Is the focal point of this litigation.
The 1855 treaty resulted in the splintering of the Wyandottes into two groups
OPINION/ORDER
The district court held that jurisdiction was not
OPINION/ORDER
Have provoked concern about the reach of the federal government and the rights of those brought into court via these statutes. The concern is even greater. Pierre Y. (
OPINION/ORDER
The narrow question in this case is whether Frank Long. Can be prosecuted by the United States for the same conduct that was the subject of an earlier tribal prosecution. If the Menominee prosecution is properly characterized as one flowing from independent sovereign powers. Then there is no Double Jeopardy bar to the subsequent federal prosecution. The Menominee were acting 2 No. 02 1473 solely under powers delegated by Congress. Then the first prosecution will stand as a bar to the second. This is a difficult question of first impression in a long line of cases dealing with Indian sovereignty beginning as early as the days of Chief Justice John Marshall.1 The district court concluded that because the Tribe's powers were first eliminated. Its prosecution of Long was undertaken as an arm of the federal government. We have come to the opposite conclusion about the source of authority that lay behind the Tribe's prosecution. The Tribe was exercising its own sovereign power. Both Long and the truck's owner are members of the Menominee Indian Tribe.
OPINION/ORDER
We have received a response and conclude that MALABED v. I The North Slope Borough is a political subdivision of the State of Alaska. Where there is more than one Native American applicant who meets the minimum qualifications for a position. A Native American is a person belonging to an Indian tribe as defined in 25 U.S.C. North Slope Borough Code § 2.20.150(A)(27).1 Plaintiffs/Appellees are not Native Americans and claim that they were denied employment with the Borough because of the Ordinance. Robert Malabed is an Asian American of Filipino descent. The Ordinance was amended to create a preference not only for qualified Native Americans. Appellees Malabed and Emerson were denied employment under the original ordinance. Appellee Welch was denied employment under the amended ordinance. These differences between the amended ordinance and the original ordinance are not material to our analysis. 1 9102 MALABED v. NORTH SLOPE BOROUGH nent employment was rejected in 1998. He was replaced by a Native American.
OPINION/ORDER
Historical documents demonstrate that the government was interested in purchasing the land for purposes of harvesting its pine timber. Is guarantied to the The plaintiff Bands in this case have referred to themselves throughout as Bands of Chippewa Indians.
OPINION/ORDER
The Keweenaw Bay Indian Community is a federally recognized Indian tribe with approximately 3. The Community is the successor in interest to the L'Anse and Ontonagon bands of Chippewa Indians. The TPTA states that its intent is to levy the tobacco tax against the consumers of tobacco products. Although it is the licensee's responsibility to collect and account for the tax. The state can tax sales made by a tribe to individuals who are not tribal members. A state like Michigan is faced with a somewhat complicated collection scheme when. The Community was party to such an agreement with the state from 1977 until the state terminated it in 1997. Revised agreements were reached with eight of the tribes. The State will now require all wholesalers and/or unclassified acquirers to collect these taxes at the point of sale even where the retail purchaser is an Indian Tribe or tribal member. All packs of cigarettes sold at retail from within Indian Country will bear a special stamp applied by the wholesaler to clearly indicate that tax has been paid. . . .
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs were Lois J. With him on the brief were Dennis Gingold. Plaintiffs sought a declaratory judgment delineating appellants' trust obligations to IIM trust benefi ciaries and injunctive relief to ensure that such trust obli gations are carried out. The district court concluded that the federal government and its officers have been derelict in their duties. Notwithstanding the fact that appel lants have taken significant steps towards the discharge of the federal government's fiduciary obligations. Appellants clearly have yet to fulfill their trust duties. The relief ordered was well within the district court's equitable powers. This is undeniable. Such duties are grounded in the very nature of the government Indian relationship. It is equally clear that the federal government has failed time and again to discharge its fiduciary duties. There is no dispute that appellants. Have failed to discharge fully their fiduciary obligations. The issue we confront is whether the district court properly delineated the contours of the obligations owed by the Interior Secretary.
Some of whom were not entitled to vote in tribal elections or hold tribal office because they do not own an interest in the Osage mineral estate or headright. Because the district court proceeded without subject matter jurisdiction in light of the Osage Tribe's sovereign immunity and because the franchise was improperly extended in this case and a federal statute prescribed the form of tribal government for the Osage Tribe. It is a final appealable order. Each appendix is consecutively numbered. We will refer to the Appendix to Appellant Osage Tribal Council's Opening Brief as
OPINION/ORDER
Was on brief for appellee. Judgment was entered in the United States District Court for the District of Maine following a jury trial. The tobacco was transported 3 3 surreptitiously into Canada through the Passamaquoddy Reservation in Pleasant Point. Passamaquoddy Tribe member Anthony Stanley testified that on April 15 he was called to discuss some tobacco business by Beverly Pierro. Who was then serving as chief of police of the Passamaquoddy Tribe (
OPINION/ORDER
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. I. Medicine Lake and the highlands surrounding it are of great spiritual significance to the Pit River Tribe and to the other Native American tribes in the region. Although the highlands are within the Pit River Tribe's ancestral homelands. They are not part of the tribe's reservation.
OPINION/ORDER
The question in this appeal is whether the federal government can. (c) refuse to extend that exemption to people who are not Native Americans but who also seek to use eagle feathers for religious purposes. The government can craft an exemption that is limited to Native Americans because such an exemption serves two important governmental goals.
OPINION/ORDER
The Tribe also argues that the Indian Gaming and Regulatory Act preempts any jurisdiction the State of California might have to apply and enforce California's laws against the Tribe. The Tribe asserts that Public 89 Law 280 is invalid because the Tenth Amendment precludes Congress from directing California to assume criminal jurisdiction over Indian lands. We find that neither the District Attorney nor the Sheriff is entitled to qualified immunity because they violated clearly established law by executing a warrant outside of their jurisdiction. A. The Bishop Paiute Tribe (
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs were Lynn E. Bryant Rogers were on the brief for amici Indian Tribes and Tribal Organizations in support of petitioner and reversal of the NLRB's judgment. With him on the brief were Ronald E. Were on the brief for intervenor State of Connecticut. The Casino is about an hour's drive from Los Angeles. Of the casino's patrons are nonmembers who come from outside the reservation.
Argued for plaintiff cross appellant The Shoshone Indian Tribe of the Wind River Reservation.With him on the brief were Lynn E. Calkins and Maria Whitehorn Votsch.Also on the brief was Richard M. Who argued for plaintiff cross appellant The Arapaho Indian Tribe of the Wind River Reservation.With him on the brief was Brian W. Argued for United States.With him on the
OPINION/ORDER
The Lower Brule Sioux Tribe sought to have 91 acres of offreservation land that it had purchased taken into trust. The land is located within the municipal limits of the city of Oacoma. Seeking review of the Secretary's action and contending that 25 U.S.C. § 465 was an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power. The district court concluded that the statute was constitutional. Held that it was without jurisdiction to review the remaining claims and dismissed the case. We concluded that the Department had interpreted its own power too broadly and was exercising that power in an unchecked manner because it had also interpreted the statute as delegating unreviewable discretionary authority to the Secretary. The Secretary of the Interior at the time the land was taken into trust was Bruce Babbitt. The current Secretary is Gale A. A significant loss in state revenue and numerous jurisdictional problems would result if the land were taken into trust. The State again filed suit in federal court to challenge the agency action.4 The suit was delayed for the completion of an environmental assessment in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act.
OPINION/ORDER
Morrison alleged that defendants refused to consider his request to obtain Native American religious items because he is not of Native American heritage. Inmates are required to specify their claimed religion. The purpose for which each item is used. Why each item is necessary. Whether each item is mandated by their religion. A religious leader of the professed faith is contacted to verify the relevance of and need for the item. Morrison is not a Native American Indian by birth. He is. HEART is not a religion. The majority of its members at GCC are not Native Americans and. That everything has a spirit and is connected.
Morrow claimed there was subject matter jurisdiction below pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1343(a)(3). (ICWA).(1) I .....Plaintiff Appellant Morrow is an
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: In this case we are called on. Plaintiffs in this case are citizens of the State of Hawaii who allege that various state programs preferentially treat persons of Hawaiian ancestry. Which this opinion will address. We hold that Plaintiffs lack standing to sue the federal government and that the district court therefore correctly dismissed all claims to which the United States is a named party or an indispensable party. We affirm the district court in finding that Plaintiffs have demonstrated standing as state taxpayers to challenge those state programs that are funded by state tax revenue and for ARAKAKI v. LINGLE 11861 which the United States is not an indispensable party. Plaintiffs therefore have standing to bring a suit claiming that the OHA programs that are funded by state tax revenue violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Provided that the Republic of Hawaii ceded all public lands to the United States and that revenues from the lands were to be
A word in the opinion is erroneously spelled. He contends the definition is unconstitutionally vague. Ray Winnie was a hataali. Yei B'Chei or Yei B'Chei jish are ceremonial adornments. Is an afficionado of Navajo culture and religion. Corrow telling him that a wealthy Chicago surgeon was interested in purchasing a set of Yei B'Chei. The purported buyer was James Tanner. Yet once he was in Santa Fe. In the cardboard box was the set of twenty two Yei B'Chei. Selling these medicine bundles or jish is the wife of the late Mr. Whose signatures are below. The selling price is in cash of $10. Corrow asserts the court erred in failing to dismiss Count one on the ground the NAGPRA definition of cultural patrimony is unconstitutionally vague. Trapping the unwary in its multitude of meanings and creating easy prey for the untrammeled discretion of law enforcement.(2) Were NAGPRA's definitional bounds nevertheless discernible. Corrow then urges the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction on either count.
Was signed into law by President Ford on January 4. The Secretaries are required to transfer resources and control of those programs to the tribe. The Act was intended to assure maximum participation by tribes in the planning and administration of federal services. A predetermined fixed rate for computing indirect costs applicable to a grant may be negotiated annually in situations where the cost experience and other pertinent facts available are deemed sufficient to enable the contracting parties to reach an informed judgment (1) as to the probable level of indirect costs in the grantee department during the period to be covered by the negotiated rate. The Secretary adds all funds that will be received by a tribe in a given fiscal year. The numerator is the amount of indirect costs the tribe is expected to incur in a given fiscal year. The numerator is divided by the denominator. To produce the amount of indirect cost funding that will be provided to a tribe in a given fiscal year. Or which are not readily assignable to the contract objectives specifically benefited without effort disproportionate to the results achieved.
Was signed into law by President Ford on January 4. The Secretaries are required to transfer resources and control of those programs to the tribe. The Act was intended to assure maximum participation by tribes in the planning and administration of federal services. A predetermined fixed rate for computing indirect costs applicable to a grant may be negotiated annually in situations where the cost experience and other pertinent facts available are deemed sufficient to enable the contracting parties to reach an informed judgment (1) as to the probable level of indirect costs in the grantee department during the period to be covered by the negotiated rate. The Secretary adds all funds that will be received by a tribe in a given fiscal year. The numerator is the amount of indirect costs the tribe is expected to incur in a given fiscal year. The numerator is divided by the denominator. To produce the amount of indirect cost funding that will be provided to a tribe in a given fiscal year. Or which are not readily assignable to the contract objectives specifically benefited without effort disproportionate to the results achieved.
OPINION/ORDER
The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act provides\ the State with a limited role in determining whether land is taken\ into trust for gaming purposes.
OPINION/ORDER
The specific question we address is whether an Indian tribe may administer TANF. Welfare oversight and funding were centralized in the hands of the federal government from the mid 1930s to the late 1970s.1 During the 1980s. TANF was intended
OPINION/ORDER
I. BACKGROUND Hamilton is incarcerated at the maximum security Potosi The facility provides crossCorrectional Center (Potosi).1 denominational religious facilities inside prison buildings. American Indian inmates at Potosi are allowed to pray. American Indians are also allowed to carry medicine bags containing ceremonial items and have access to a ceremonial pipe and kinnikinnik (a ceremonial
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: In this case we are called on. Plaintiffs in this case are citizens of the State of Hawaii who allege that various state programs preferentially treat persons of Hawaiian ancestry. Which this opinion will address. We are issuing a complete opinion in support of our judgment following remand from the Supreme Court. We hold that Plaintiffs lack standing to sue the federal government and that the district court therefore correctly dismissed all claims to which the United States is a named party or an indispensable party. We reverse the district court's finding that Plaintiffs have demonstrated standing as state taxpayers to challenge those programs that are funded by state tax revenue and for which the United States is not an indispensable party. Lack standing to bring a suit claiming that the OHA programs that are funded by state tax revenue violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Although it is not clear that any Plaintiffs have standing in any other capacity to challenge the OHA programs.
OPINION/ORDER
Is classified under the General Schedule established by 5 U.S.C. §§ 5101 5115 (1994). Positions are classified according to their difficulty and level of responsibility. Pay rates are set accordingly. Are characterized by the
OPINION/ORDER
Is amended as follows: At slip opinion page 16021.
OPINION/ORDER
Is amended as follows: At slip opinion page 16021.
OPINION/ORDER
WL (9th Cir. 2004) (unpublished disposition). **This appeal was withdrawn from submission pending the United States Supreme Court's decision in Miller El v. This Opinion was circulated to the panel on October 23. 1 we hold the state court's
OPINION/ORDER
Burlock & Woodcock was on brief. If the dispute here involves an
OPINION/ORDER
Luckerman was on brief. Russell was on brief. Were on brief. We reverse.
OPINION/ORDER
Was a renown and beloved leader of the Oglala Sioux. There is a national Crazy Horse Monument under construction in South Dakota. As well as damages. 1 2 The Rosebud Sioux Reservation is located in South Dakota. A land that truly speaks of the spirit that is America. On or in connection with any goods or 54 that the Estate did not have standing to sue under the Indian Arts and Crafts Act. Which (A) is likely to cause confusion. Shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or she is or is likely to be damaged by such act. 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a). 6 at 214 16. 5 The Rosebud Sioux Supreme Court then remanded the case to the tribal court for a
896 (10th Cir. 1992) (holding that this court will not consider an issue not properly raised below). The defense of qualified immunity is therefore moot. SeeGriffin v. 554 (10th Cir. 1991) (holding that this court will not
OPINION/ORDER
Is substituted as defendant pursuant to Fed. Is substituted as defendant pursuant to Fed. Voided the lease saying the FONSI was issued in violation of NEPA. The BIA office in South Dakota arranged for the preparation of a project EA which was finalized in August. The lease between the Tribe and Sun Prairie was executed on September 8. The parties to the D.C. litigation then entered into a joint stipulation of dismissal and the case was dismissed without prejudice. Which was later extended. Which actions would have the purpose or consequence of interfering or attempting to interfere with the construction or operation of the project that is the subject of this action.
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: The San Francisco Peaks in the Coconino National Forest in northern Arizona have long standing religious significance to numerous Indian tribes of the American Southwest. The Arizona Snowbowl is a ski area on Humphrey's Peak. Plaintiffs appellants are the Navajo Nation. Defendantsappellees are the United States Forest Service. Humphrey's Peak is the highest point in the state. The Peaks are located within the 1.8 million acres of the Coconino National Forest. A traditional cultural property is one
OPINION/ORDER
Holding that the Tribes did not have standing to challenge the agreement. Because the Tribes have not demonstrated the injury in fact required for Article III standing. ANALYSIS Standing is a question of law. Federal courts are presumed to 9092 lack jurisdiction. Standing is an essential. The first element it must show is that it has
OPINION/ORDER
Holding that the Tribes did not have standing to challenge the agreement. Because the Tribes have not demonstrated the injury in fact required for Article III standing. ANALYSIS Standing is a question of law. Federal courts are presumed to 9092 lack jurisdiction. Standing is an essential. The first element it must show is that it has
OPINION/ORDER
Holding that the Tribes did not have standing to challenge the agreement. Because the Tribes have not demonstrated the injury in fact required for Article III standing. ANALYSIS Standing is a question of law. Federal courts are presumed to 9092 lack jurisdiction. Standing is an essential. The first element it must show is that it has
OPINION/ORDER
Appeal from the dismissal of a complaint alleging that the State of New York was wrongly in possession of land to which the Plaintiff Appellant claimed Indian title. Were. That the action was barred by the Eleventh Amendment. That complaint was dismissed voluntarily. An amended complaint naming only the defendants who are before us on appeal was filed. The Tribe has exercised
Because resolution of the NAGPRA issue is determinative of this matter. Since the Bradbury Museum is a
OPINION/ORDER
Determined that the Tribe was not entitled to the refund after all. The Tribe does not claim that it was entitled to a refund of the excise taxes. I. A proper understanding of the statutory framework is critical to the resolution of this dispute. Some sales of gasoline are exempt from the excise tax. A Native American tribal government is considered a state
OPINION/ORDER
White Horse maintains first that his indictment was so fatally flawed as to deprive the district court that tried him of jurisdiction. White Horse was indicted for aggravated sexual abuse under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2241(c) and 1152. He asserts that he is in fact an Indian and argues that the district court therefore had no jurisdiction over his case. If it is one. White Horse is an Indian would not deprive the district court of jurisdiction to try him for a violation of § 1152. It might have been a relevant matter at trial. White Horse's status was. White Horse's assertion that he is an Indian is relevant to the matter of proof but irrelevant on the matter of jurisdiction. White Horse now argues that the government's proof was insufficient because non Indian 2 status is an element of the offense under § 1152. The government never proved that he was not an Indian. Maintains that Indian status is an affirmative defense to a charge under § 1152 and that Mr. Even if one were to assume his Indian status. The government contends that the error was not prejudicial because 18 U.S.C. § 1153 criminalizes the very acts charged in the indictment in any event: That statute provides that
With them on the briefs were Michael A. With him on the brief were John S. With her on the brief was M. Squire was on the brief for intervenors American Rivers. This license was designated a
OPINION/ORDER
Burgess was involuntarily committed to a Wisconsin state mental health facility after a jury found that he was a sexually violent person as defined in Wisconsin's Sexually Violent Person Commitment Statutes. Burgess now appeals to this court. 2 No. 05 1663 What distinguishes this case from the many habeas corpus petitions this court entertains each term is that it involves one additional sovereign Burgess is a member of a federally recognized Indian tribe. We conclude that the Supreme Court of Wisconsin's ultimate resolution of Burgess's jurisdictional claim was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established law as articulated by the Supreme Court of the United States. I Burgess is an enrolled member of the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians (Lac du Flambeau). He is a legal resident of his tribal reservation land. Burgess was convicted of attempted second degree sexual assault of a child (a crime that he committed on his reservation) in the Circuit Court for Vilas County.
OPINION/ORDER
Is spending two years in prison for violating the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA). Antoine is a member of the Cowichan Band of the Salish Indian Tribe in British Columbia. Antoine claims that these exchanges are part of the native custom of
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: This case is a powerful indictment of the criminal justice system. Our social and penal policies are failing to alleviate alcohol abuse on Indian reservations and the crime to which it gives rise. Jr. (
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
Nato Indian Nation (Nato) appeals the dismissal of its complaint against the State of Utah by the United States District Court for the District of Utah. Whose citizenship is comprised of federally supervised and non federally supervised indigenous citizens from various [Native American] tribal affiliations . . . .
They complained that HUD has been funding ASHA housing projects that are outside ASHA's proper area of operation. They also moved unsuccessfully to have the assigned district judge disqualify herself. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
Apfel incorrectly identified the year the decision was filed. The correct year is 1999. The sentence is corrected to read as follows:
See. They complained that HUD has been funding ASHA housing projects that are outside ASHA's proper area of operation. They also moved unsuccessfully to have the assigned district judge disqualify herself. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
The issue in this case is whether the Cheyenne Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma (
OPINION/ORDER
I. This matter is before the en banc court to review issues emanating from the panel opinion in O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal v. The underlying facts relating to the parties and the issues are fully described in the panel opinion and are therefore unnecessary to reiterate here. The en banc court is divided over the outcome of this case. The en banc court holds that courts in this Circuit must recognize that any preliminary injunction fitting within one of the disfavored categories must be more closely scrutinized to assure that the exigencies of the case support the granting of a remedy that is extraordinary even in the normal course. Movants seeking such an injunction are not entitled to rely on this Circuit's modified likelihood of success on the merits standard. A majority of the en banc court is of the view that the district court's entry of a preliminary injunction in this case should be affirmed. The decision of the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico to grant UDV's request for a preliminary injunction is hereby AFFIRMED.
OPINION/ORDER
Was that day driving a SKC dump truck on United States Highway 93 as it ran through the Flathead Reservation. Smith was driving as part of his work on a vocational course at SKC. All claims were resolved before trial. That cross claim alleged that SKC was liable for the accident and also asserted a claim of spoliation of evidence. While that second tribal court appeal was pending. Which is now before us. The district court found that SKC was a tribal entity for jurisdictional purposes and that Smith's claims arose on the reservation. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. 358 (2001) (
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs were Peter D. With him on the brief were G. The bulk of the funds in the accounts are the proceeds of various transactions in land allotted to individual Indians under the General Allotment Act of 1887. The IIM funds have quite a different legal status from the allotment land itself. It gave the Indian beneficiaries the right to possess and manage the lands except insofar as alienation was involved. The IIM funds are by statute under the full control of the United States. Duties related to
OPINION/ORDER
MacMahon were on brief for appellants.
OPINION/ORDER
Thompson is substituted for his predecessor. We hold that the agency's interpretation of the congressional appropriation of funds was consistent with congressional intent and reverse the district court's award of additional funding for contract support costs. 1 Indian tribes are encouraged to take over administration of various programs that the federal government used 1 See 25 U.S.C. § 450 450n (2000). 14679 to administer for their benefit. The tribes get the money that the government would otherwise have used to administer and perform the services. 3 The government is not allowed to save money by hiring the tribes to perform the programs for less money than the government would have spent. The statute provides that contracts between the government and the tribes for tribal takeover of programs have to include money that shall
OPINION/ORDER
Thompson is substituted for his predecessor. We hold that the agency's interpretation of the congressional appropriation of funds was consistent with congressional intent and reverse the district court's award of additional funding for contract support costs. 1 Indian tribes are encouraged to take over administration of various programs that the federal government used 1 See 25 U.S.C. § 450 450n (2000). 14679 to administer for their benefit. The tribes get the money that the government would otherwise have used to administer and perform the services. 3 The government is not allowed to save money by hiring the tribes to perform the programs for less money than the government would have spent. The statute provides that contracts between the government and the tribes for tribal takeover of programs have to include money that shall
OPINION/ORDER
The treaties at issue in this action are the Treaty of Neah Bay. The Treaty of Neah Bay provided that: [t]he right of taking fish and of whaling or sealing at usual and accustomed grounds and stations is further secured to said Indians in common with all citizens of the United States. We have construed similar treaty language2 as entitling
The Act further stipulates that the Secretary will provide funding for the administration of those programs. The basic idea behind the ISDA is to promote tribal autonomy and self determination by permitting tribes to operate programs previously operated by the federal government. The Secretary is obligated to provide funding for those self determination contracts or compacts
OPINION/ORDER
Thompson is substituted for his predecessor. Is amended as follows: At page 14687. Replace the sentence
OPINION/ORDER
I Oti Kaga is a non profit corporation established by the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribal government pursuant to the United States Housing Act of 1937. Oti Kaga's purpose is to acquire. SDHDA is an independent public instrumentality exercising essential public functions under S.D. SDHDA is responsible for. Thomas Schramm and Leland Kleinsasser are members of SDHDA's Board of Commissioners. Appellee Darlys Baum is SDHDA's Executive Director. Baum and the board members were sued individually and in their official capacities. Is authorized by IRC § 42. State housing agencies are responsible for allocating tax credits for the construction of low income housing. The annual plan must be prepared by the state's housing agency and approved by the governmental unit of which the agency is a part. SDHDA is the authorized housing agency for South Dakota. The second program at issue is the HOME Program. Indian tribes were participating jurisdictions in the HOME Program. 42 U.S.C. § 12747(a)(2). Indian housing assistance was funded directly through Indian Housing Block Grants (IHBG).
OPINION/ORDER
Our review is de novo. Eagleboy is not a member of a federally recognized Indian tribe. If he were. He would not have been charged with a violation of the MBTA. Concluding that the policy of not enforcing the MBTA against members of federally recognized Indian tribes is unconstitutional because it was not established by statute or regulation. The United States argues that the policy in question rests on the nonracial basis of tribal membership and that the adoption of the policy informally rather than by statute or regulation is irrelevant to the policy's constitutionality. The United States contends that the non enforcement policy was adopted to carry out the special obligations of trust incumbent on the United States in its relations with federally recognized Indian tribes. That the policy was neither motivated by a racially invidious purpose nor does it have a racially discriminatory effect. The United States is correct that the non enforcement policy distinguishes between persons on the basis of membership in a federally recognized Indian tribe.
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: In this case we determine whether the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Indian Reservation (Colville) is foreclosed by res judicata from asserting the claim of its Wenatchi Constituent Tribe (Wenatchi) to fishing rights at the Wenatshapam Fishery on Icicle Creek. The district court The name was changed from
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs were Lois J. With her on the briefs was Alexan der W. With him on the briefs was Mark Chavaree. With her on the brief were John H. Were on the brief for intervenor State of Maine. Manahan were on the brief for intervenor Great Northern Paper. The petitions are denied. 1 American Rivers. Which is part of the Penobscot Mills Project.2 Constructed in 1899. Though that order was also listed in the petitions for review. 3 Interior initially recommended flows of 500 cfs and later in creased the recommendation to 945 cfs. In addition to the power and development purposes for which licenses are issued. The Commission retains authority to decide that recommended conditions are
OPINION/ORDER
The district court found that CRC's state law claims are preempted by federal law. After which Harrah's and CRC entered into a
Claiming he was discharged in violation of the ADEA. It was entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity from suit in federal court.(1) The district court rejected that contention. While this appeal was pending. II ELEVENTH AMENDMENT We first address PSU's claim that our Eleventh Amendment immunity determination in Hurd II was overruled by Seminole Tribe. A single panel is permitted to reconsider a previous Tenth Circuit decision to the extent the new case law invalidates our previous analysis. It is appropriate for us to review its impact on our previous ruling. The district court concluded that the 1974 ADEA amendments were enacted pursuant to Congress' Fourteenth Amendment authority and that Congress had intended to subject states to suit. We did not specifically state we were adopting the district court's conclusion that Congress had acted pursuant to its Fourteenth Amendment authority. Was flawed in several respects. We will consider each of PSU's arguments. A. Intent to Abrogate PSU contends the district court's analysis of Congress' intent to abrogate was flawed for two reasons: the district court looked to the legislative history of the ADEA in violation of Seminole Tribe's express prohibition of such recourse.
OPINION/ORDER
Because we hold that the College was a tribal agency immune from suit. The College's board of trustees is comprised of one enrolled member from each of the Tribe's seven districts. After their contracts were not renewed. Was served. After the jury awarded damages but before judgment was entered. The court also stated
There is little dispute about the events leading to Robert's injury by his biological father. An administrator at a mental health center where Terri Tuthill was being treated for chronic mental illness sent a letter to SRS requesting a home study of the expectant parents. Defendant Mary Keady was assigned to the case by her supervisor. Even though the requested home study was outside SRS policy. She received no answer.
The day after Robert was born. It was decided that the Tuthills should keep the baby and be given intensive support services. Keady contacted the BIA and arrangements were made for close supervision and frequent home visits by a social worker to help with parenting skills. Apart from an incident in which the social worker was unable on one occasion to reach the Tuthills (about which Keady was consulted). Nothing eventful was related to SRS for a month and a half.
On a Friday in late September. Keady called the BIA but was unable to reach her contact person there.
OPINION/ORDER
The three plaintiffs appellants are Grand River Enterprises Six Nations. Defendants appellees are thirty one current and former state attorneys general sued in their official capacities. Appellants argue that these dismissals were erroneous. Which was necessary to permit this appeal to be heard. We conclude that the district court was correct in granting Rule 54(b) The five territories are American Samoa. The result was a Master Settlement Agreement. Previously settled with twenty two of the states and was not party to the MSA. Which manufactured approximately 97.5% of all The cigarettes sold in the country when the MSA was signed. Are referred to in the MSA as Original Participating Manufacturers (
OPINION/ORDER
The three plaintiffs appellants are Grand River Enterprises Six Nations. Defendants appellees are thirty one current and former state attorneys general sued in their official capacities. Appellants argue that these dismissals were erroneous. Which was necessary to permit this appeal to be heard. We conclude that the district court was correct in granting Rule 54(b) The five territories are American Samoa. The result was a Master Settlement Agreement. Previously settled with twenty two of the states and was not party to the MSA. Which manufactured approximately 97.5% of all The cigarettes sold in the country when the MSA was signed. Are referred to in the MSA as Original Participating Manufacturers (
OPINION/ORDER
We relate the facts of this case in somewhat more detail than is customary. Finn are enrolled members of the Band. When Pemberton was secretary treasurer of the Leech Lake Reservation Business Committee (LLRBC). Brown was one of three district representatives on the LLRBC. Finn was the Band's legal counsel.3 Before 1985. 1985 would have increased the previous year's property casualty premium from $122. The Band could
OPINION/ORDER
Was convicted by a jury of assault with a dangerous weapon. Phelps was sentenced to 81 months in prison. (2) that the District Court1 did not have The Honorable John B. United States District Judge for the District of South Dakota. 1 jurisdiction over him because the land on which he resided was not part of the Yankton Sioux Indian Reservation. (4) that the evidence was not sufficient to support his convictions. (6) that the District Court erred when it found that the officer's entrance into Phelps's home was consensual. I. Phelps is a Caucasian male. Phelps leased a house which is located on a tract of trust land that is owned by the Yankton Sioux Indian Tribe. Phelps was arraigned in the Yankton Sioux Tribal Court for aggravated assault and possession of a weapon by an intoxicated person. Phelps pled guilty to both counts and a judgment of conviction was entered by the tribal court on December 6. A federal indictment was filed in the United States District Court for the District of South Dakota charging Phelps with assault with a dangerous weapon.
OPINION/ORDER
Appellant Kevin Lee Hebah was convicted of one count of sexual abuse by engaging in a sexual act with another person incapable of appraising the nature of the conduct or physically incapable of declining participation. Exclusion of his expert witness at trial. (1) This order and judgment is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case. That she may have been sexually assaulted the prior evening while on the Wind River Indian Reservation at a party attended by several individuals. She was placed on a couch in the living room and a blanket was thrown over her. Hebah and told him the only way he could
OPINION/ORDER
Appellant. * * * * * * * * * * * Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Dakota The clerk is directed to vacate the panel's January 4. The pending rehearing and rehearing en banc petitions are not affected by this order. Was convicted by a jury of assault with a dangerous weapon. Phelps was sentenced to 81 months in prison. (2) that the District Court1 did not have jurisdiction over him because the land on which he resided was not part of the 1 The Honorable John B. (4) that the evidence was not sufficient to support his convictions. (6) that the District Court erred when it found that the officer's entrance into Phelps's home was consensual. I. Phelps is a Caucasian male. Phelps leased a house which is located on a tract of trust land that is owned by the Yankton Sioux Indian Tribe. Phelps was arraigned in the Yankton Sioux Tribal Court for aggravated assault and possession of a weapon by an intoxicated person. Phelps pled guilty to both counts and a judgment of conviction was entered by the tribal court on December 6.
That the lands in question are not part of the Uintah Valley Reservation. The district court held that it was bound under the
OPINION/ORDER
We are presented with three questions. The first is whether. It is feasible to join the Navajo Nation as a party. We hold that it is feasible to join the Nation in order to effect complete relief between the parties. Because the EEOC is an agency of the United States. The second is whether the EEOC's claim presents a nonjusticiable political question. The third is whether the district court erred in dismissing the EEOC's claim that Peabody failed to keep records as required by Title VII. They are qualified. 493 (2003) (explaining that the Department of the Interior's approval is necessary before the leases become effective). If the lease terms are violated. Alleging that Peabody was unlawfully discriminating on the basis of national origin by implementing the Navajo employment preference. As well as unspecified other non Navajo Native Americans for positions for which they were otherwise qualified. On the Navajo and Hopi reservations and on the tribes' joint land have been extensively litigated. Navajo employment preference provisions also have been the subject of prior litigation.
OPINION/ORDER
Were on the briefs. Was on the briefs. Here we are presented with a will contest involving a member of an Indian tribe in a Department of the Interior probate proceeding where we must decide whether state or federal law of evidence applies. Covington executed a will leaving all her Indian trust allotments to her great grandson. The will listed one of Covington's grandchildren. Though the term
OPINION/ORDER
Under which C.K. will remain confined until his twentyfirst birthday. We have jurisdiction over his appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We hold that the sentence imposed was both arbitrary and in direct contravention of the rehabilitative purposes of the FJDA and therefore an abuse of discretion. Factual Background C.K. is a fourteen year old member of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe. He was born in Montana and spent the first six years of his life on the Fort Belknap Indian reservation with his parents and other family members. C.K. attended Head Start and could read and count to 100 by the time he was three. When C.K. was around six. C.K. was referred to the Fort Belknap Health Center (
OPINION/ORDER
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm. The location they chose was on property belonging to the Gila River Indian Community (
OPINION/ORDER
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm. The location they chose was on property belonging to the Gila River Indian Community (
Assuming other requisites of the Act are . We have jurisdiction to review the . The contract would have authorized the Tribe to establish Class . Class II Indian gaming is that . Lands title to which is . Is . The owners of the land into the Tribe is alone not sufficient evidence of tribal authority to bring the . From concluding the NIGC's decision was the product of
OPINION/ORDER
Held that the district court should have dismissed the treaty based claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Thereby breaching its fiduciary responsibilities to the Tribe under the Treaty. [1] These claims are not properly brought under the FTCA. Would be liable to the claimant in accordance with the law of the place where the act or omission occurred. 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b)(1) (emphasis added).2 The Tribe's claims against the United States are properly characterized not as tort claims. The claims are thus quite different from those in cases like Berkovitz v. Which was rejected on November 20. The Coast Guard acted negligently in its operation of a lighthouse because it did not
OPINION/ORDER
Is amended as follows. Is deleted. Judge Berzon's opinion dissenting in part is amended as follows. Footnote 1 of the dissenting opinion is revised to read as follows:
OPINION/ORDER
We are asked to decide whether an American Indian Tribal Court has subject matter jurisdiction over a tort case which arose out of an automobile accident which occurred between two non Indian parties on an Indian reservation. We now hold that the tribal court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over the dispute. Fredericks suffered serious injuries and was hospitalized for 24 days. A 1 is a non tribal company located in Dickinson. Stockert is not a member of the tribe and resides in Dickinson. Fredericks is not a member of the tribe. She was married to a tribal member (now deceased). Her adult children are enrolled members of the tribe. A 1 was working on the reservation under a subcontract agreement with LCM Corporation. The record is not clear whether Stockert was engaged in work under the contract at the time of the accident.1 There is no proof (as opposed to allegations) that we can find in the record to support the district court's finding of fact that A 1 was in performance of the contract at the time of the accident.
OPINION/ORDER
Were on brief for appellants. Lacouture and Peabody & Brown were on brief for the Narragansett Electric Company. Jefferson Melish was on brief for the Narragansett Indian Tribe of Rhode Island and the Narragansett Indian Wetuomuck Housing Authority. The
OPINION/ORDER
I. Background The historical background against which Coyote Valley and the State negotiated is important to an understanding of this case.
OPINION/ORDER
Is either a mascot or a symbol of the university. Southern Illinois (Salukis) have nicknames that would make any list of ones that are pretty cool. Small schools in this circuit are no slouches in the cool nickname department. One would have a hard time beating the Hustlin' Quakers of Earlham College (Richmond. Most schools have mundane nicknames. How can one feel unique when your school's nickname is Tigers (43 different colleges or universities). Are pretty generic and pretty boring. There are a few princes. The Judges (we are particularly partial to this one) of Brandeis University. Or the Vixens (will this nickname be changed if the school goes coed?) of Sweet Briar College in Virginia? As wonderful as all these are. One thing is fairly clear although most are not at all controversial. Some are. Even the Banana Slug was born out of controversy. For many 2 3 What in the world is a
It's opinion and order affirming in part and reversing in part is published at 115 S. The case was submitted to the district court upon stipulated facts on cross motions for summary judgment. It does not collect sales taxes on its sales to tribal or non tribal members but is required to pay sales taxes on motor fuel products and beer when it purchases them from its wholesale vendors at said retail locations. Defendants [the State] impose sales taxes on retail purchases of goods made by plaintiff where defendants contend such goods are used for
OPINION/ORDER
During the The victims are granddaughters of Rosemary Rouse. R. was placed with Donna Jordan. Who reported to the Tribe's Department of Social Services (
OPINION/ORDER
Were on brief. Was on brief. Was on brief. Was on brief. Both the Narragansetts and the State of Rhode Island filed suits disputing the issue of whether the Tribe's operation of a smoke shop and sale of cigarettes on the Tribe's settlement lands are exempt from the application and enforcement of Rhode Island's cigarette tax laws. The State initially filed its complaint in Rhode Island state court and the Narragansetts removed the case to federal district court in an attempt to have it decided together with the Tribe's complaint. Which was brought in federal district court. The district court found that it did not have jurisdiction over the state case and remanded it to the state court. We are asked whether the district court could exercize jurisdiction over the State's complaint. 6 7 (1st Cir. 1997).
The Narragansett Indian Tribe is a federally recognized
Indian tribe located in the State of Rhode Island.
OPINION/ORDER
Arguing the indictment was improperly based on falsehoods because his
OPINION/ORDER
Was signed into law. The purpose of the IGRA was to
OPINION/ORDER
The Tribe brought suit under various federal laws and federal common law and is primarily concerned with damage to the environment. Our focus here is the Tribe's claim under § 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (
OPINION/ORDER
ORDER The Petition for Rehearing in No. 00 35002 is denied and the Suggestion for Rehearing En Banc in No. 00 35002 is denied. 2002 is amended. The amendments to the opinion are as follows: 1. Replace the words
OPINION/ORDER
If the tribe was acting pursuant to its inherent power when it prosecuted Enas. Then the dual prosecutions were undertaken by separate sovereigns. Were therefore constitutionally permissible. The tribe was exercising power delegated by Congress. Then it was acting as an
OPINION/ORDER
If the tribe was acting pursuant to its inherent power when it prosecuted Enas. Then the dual prosecutions were undertaken by separate sovereigns. Were therefore constitutionally permissible. The tribe was exercising power delegated by Congress. Then it was acting as an
OPINION/ORDER
These matters are before the court on the petition for rehearing filed on behalf of Garfield and Kane Counties. We have determined to amend the original panel opinion on page 86. A copy of the amended opinion is attached to this order. The petition for panel rehearing is otherwise denied in all respects. Most of the transportation routes of the West were established under its authority. R.S. 2477 rights of way were an integral part of the congressional pro development lands policy. The statute thus had the effect of
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: We must decide whether Indian tribes have sovereign immunity from an Idaho state tax on motor fuel delivered by non tribal distributors to tribally owned gas stations for sale on Indian reservations. The state is barred from re litigating the matter. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Substantially all proceeds from the state motor fuel tax are used for highway construction and maintenance. When such fuels are not for the exclusive use of the United States. (b) The officer in charge of such reservation shall. Or the District of Columbia within whose borders the reservation is located. Showing the amount of such motor fuel with respect to which taxes are payable under subsection (a) for the preceding month. 4 U.S.C. § 104 (emphasis added). The amended law declared that the legal incidence of the tax was not on the retailer. Was on the distributor. 2002 Idaho Sess. To expressly impose the legal incidence of motor fuels taxes upon the motor fuel distributor who receives (as
OPINION/ORDER
Pollock & Sheehan were on brief. Dean & Wilder were on brief. This determination is tinged with more than the usual quotient of public interest. We set aside the district court's determination that the parties' dispute over the applicability of state jurisdiction is not yet ripe for adjudication and hold that Congress's grant of jurisdiction to the state in the Rhode Island Indian Claims Settlement Act of 1978. That the Narragansetts have concurrent jurisdiction over. Are entitled to invoke the Gaming Act. The former is impliedly repealed. We affirm both the district court's directive that Rhode Island enter into 2 good faith negotiations to draft a tribal state compact under which gaming operations can be mounted and its refusal to grant relief to various governmental figures and entities who have challenged the Tribe's entitlement to the extraordinary prophylaxis of the Gaming Act. THE SETTLEMENT LANDS We begin with a thumbnail sketch of how the land mass that is the breeding ground for this dispute came to be held in trust for the Tribe.
OPINION/ORDER
Is amended as follows: At slip op. 8609. Is DENIED. Circuit Judge: We hold that an unincorporated Indian tribe such as appellee is not a
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: We hold that an unincorporated Indian tribe such as appellee is not a
OPINION/ORDER
Were on brief. Were on brief. Were on brief. Continue their efforts to recover a portion of their ancestral lands which they claim were wrongfully taken from them by European colonists in the 17th century. Seeking a declaration that they are the lawful and equitable owners of approximately thirty four square miles of land in Rhode Island. Which they claimed was wrongfully taken from the Tribe's ancestors. Contending that the Tribe's claims were barred by the Rhode Island Indian Claims Settlement Act (
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > Tamiami Partners v. The officers of these tribal entities who are responsible for overseeing the gaming operation (the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="424"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//aug95/94-4403.man.html">TAMIAMI PARTNERS V. MICCOSUKEE TRIBE OF INDIANS<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Tamiami Partners v. The officers of these tribal entities who are responsible for overseeing the gaming operation (the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="422"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-3256.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Appellants' petition for rehearing is granted in part. A revised opinion is filed with this order. Rehearing en banc is denied. The Sunflower Army Ammunition Plant (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="422"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/5005B5A345F5EE6C88256D3A005439D9/$file/0135028.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The United States alleging they were harmed by the Cushman Hydroelectric Project (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="421"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/75C640A55315A44E88256F850079CCD4/$file/0217048.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Died when her Ford Expedition patrol vehicle rolled over while she was driving on a dirt road within the Navajo Nation. The road is a reservation road. There is no federal or state right of way. The road is not located on non Indian fee land. The cause of the rollover accident is disputed. Ford asserts that Todecheene was not wearing a seatbelt. Counter that the Ford Expedition was defective and the seatbelt was not working properly. Was defective and unreasonably dangerous in design or manufacture. Financed the purchase of the Expedition Because our resolution of the subject matter jurisdiction question is outcome determinative. The district court also held that Ford was not required to exhaust tribal court remedies before challenging the tribal court's jurisdiction in federal court. Because jurisdiction was plainly lacking and exhaustion would serve only to delay the proceedings. STANDARDS OF REVIEW Whether a tribal court properly exercised its jurisdiction is The Appellants did not argue this theory of subject matter jurisdiction in their Opening Briefs.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="421"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/96/11/951554P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
These defendants are Jesse Rouse. Who was acquitted by the jury. The children are referred to by initials in the text of this The jury acquitted the defendants of the remaining charges. The appellants raise twelve allegations of error in the trial of the case.1 We grant relief on two issues: (1) refusal to allow expert opinion testimony by a court appointed psychologist that the children's evidence and testimony became tainted by suggestive influences to which the children were subject in the investigation and trial. 11) whether the defendants were denied due process right to fair trial when the Department of Social Services. The appellants are entitled to a new trial on these grounds. Sufficiency of the evidence is not an issue. An examination of the record establishes that the medical evidence was inconclusive as to abuse or abuse by the defendants and that the children's reports of abuse may have been tainted by the influence of social workers and law enforcement officials who investigated and prepared the government's case.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="419"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9F2D0E6B6C3941E788256E0100727307/$file/0216508.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Presiding *The Honorable Arnold Schwarzenegger is substituted for his predecessor. Circuit Judge: Plaintiffs are California card clubs and charities that are prohibited under California state law from offering casinostyle gaming.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="419"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/00opinions/00-1587.html">SERENA DEWAKUKU V. MEL R. MARTINEZ<BR></A><BR>
Argued for defendant appellant.<span style=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="416"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200311/02-5277a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="415"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/03/02-4099.htm">02-4099 -- NATURAL ARCH AND BRIDGE SOCIETY V. ALSTON -- 03/23/2004<BR></A><BR>
The gist of the complaint was as follows: <p> This case concerns the management policies and practices of Defendant National Park Service (Park Service) that prevent visitors to the Rainbow Bridge National Monument (Rainbow Bridge or Monument) from approaching the rock span that is the central attraction of the Monument unless those visitors are Native Americans or are engaging in Native American religious ceremonies. <p> The first cause of action was based on an alleged violation of the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Cause of action was based on an alleged violation of
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="412"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/BB1BBF996F636D9B882570D60004C895/$file/0117489.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Lara was decided April 19. The United States was entitled to intervene. Is withdrawn. An opinion is filed contemporaneously with this order. The petitions for rehearing and rehearing en banc are denied as moot. Circuit Judge: This case concerns whether an Indian tribe can exercise criminal jurisdiction over a person who is not a member of the tribe. Who is an enrolled member of another Indian tribe. Facts This is an appeal from a denial of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Who is an Omaha Indian. The offenses are misdemeanors under the Navajo Code. He argued that the tribal court had no jurisdiction over him because he was not a Navajo. Means testified that he is an enrolled member of the Oglala Sioux Tribe of Indians and a permanent resident of Porcupine. Means lived on the Navajo Indian Reservation from 1987 to 1997 when he was married to a woman who was a half Navajo. The alleged offenses occurred later when Means was visiting the Navajo reservation. Means testified that the difference between an OglalaSioux and a Navajo is analogous to the difference in nationalities between an American and a French person.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="411"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/05/042310P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Roy was convicted of one count of assault with a dangerous weapon in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 113(a)(3) (count 1). Was also acting as a member of the Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribal Police Department. An individual named Michael Roy was vandalizing the duplex of Glen Rederth. Roy responded by repeatedly telling Van Roekel that he was going to kill him. He specifically stated that he was going to kill
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="409"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/CE5E9CE16D0D776F88256A8B0059D05A/$file/9935874.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The issues before us are jurisdictional. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The court found that: (1) the case was moot because the Tribe BIA contract had been completed and the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="409"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/C22C6168E456491788256E5A00707BE9/$file/9935874.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The issues before us are jurisdictional. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The court found that: (1) the case was moot because the Tribe BIA contract had been completed and the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="409"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0151p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Declaring that it is permissible for the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="408"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/04/09/032388P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Which is located on the Rosebud Reservation. Was borne out of her relationship with Medearis. 3 2 from the record. Whiting's efforts to find Medearis that evening were unsuccessful.4 The following day. Whiting saw Medearis while she was driving around Mission. As she was familiar with the car's distinctive sound. Like he was going to hit her. Medearis returned to his car. 4 Medearis was on a date with another woman that night. Why he was coming to see her to work things out when he had a hickey on his neck from somebody else. These screams were not only heard by Fred Whiting but also by a neighbor of Fred Whiting's. Donald Bear Robe. 5 Donald Bear Robe did not call the police because he believed what transpired was a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="407"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//july99/97-5361.opn.html">FLORIDA V. SEMINOLE TRIBE OF FLORIDA(7/20/1999, NO. 97-5361)<BR></A><BR>
<A HREF=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="407"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Nov2002/013301.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: The primary issues presented in this appeal from the District Court's order denying preliminary injunctive relief are whether the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment allow the Borough of Tenafly. Because there is no evidence that the acts in question are expressive. Because the other requirements for injunctive relief are satisfied. In practice they have often done so. House number signs nailed to utility poles in plain view are 1. Our description of the facts is based on our independent review of the record because. Local churches are tacitly allowed to post permanent directional signs bearing crosses on municipal property. Orange ribbons were affixed to utility poles
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="407"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/july99/97-5361.opn.html">FLORIDA V. SEMINOLE TRIBE OF FLORIDA(7/20/1999, NO. 97-5361)<BR></A><BR>
<A HREF=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="406"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/094EE0D365F5F35A88256C150057358C/$file/9936166.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Was seriously injured when his car struck a horse that had wandered onto Route 5. McDonald is an enrolled member of the Ogalala Sioux Tribe. He is not a member of the Northern Cheyenne Tribe. Alleging McDonald was negligent in allowing his horse to trespass onto Route 5. The Supreme Court held that a tribal court lacks authority over the conduct of nonmembers on land within a reservation that is owned in fee by a non Indian.2 Id. at 565 566. Means argues that Route 5 is in fact a tribal road exempted from the Strate analysis. The primary issue in this case is thus whether BIA roads. Are non Indian fee land subject to the Montana rule. A. Route 5 is a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="404"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/08/02-5084.htm">02-5084 -- BRUNER V. BRUNER -- 08/08/2003<BR></A><BR>
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> Plaintiff Diana Bruner. Seeking a declaration that the Estate is the equitable owner of certain tracts of land to which Leda and Bim hold legal title. The district court entered summary judgment against Plaintiff on the grounds that her claims were barred by the clean hands and estoppel doctrines. Were contrary to federal laws governing the sale and encumbrance of restricted Indian lands. Restricted Indian land is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-4.gif" ALT="402"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/39D9594EA705D491882570660055C982/$file/0117489.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Lara was decided April 19. The United States was entitled to intervene. Circuit Judge: This case concerns whether an Indian tribe can exercise criminal jurisdiction over a person who is not a member of the tribe. Who is an enrolled member of another Indian tribe. NAVAJO NATION 11195 Facts This is an appeal from a denial of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Who is an Omaha Indian. The offenses are misdemeanors under the Navajo Code. He argued that because he was not a Navajo. Means testified that he is a member of the Oglala Sioux Tribe of Indians. Means lived on the Navajo Indian Reservation from 1987 to 1997 when he was married to a woman who was a half Navajo. The alleged offenses occurred later when Means was visiting the Navajo reservation. Means testified that the difference between an OglalaSioux and a Navajo is as different as an American and a French person. § 316. 3 Membership in the Navajo Nation is conditioned upon no less than one fourth degree of Navajo blood. The Navajo Supreme Court decision says that while there are preferences for Navajos in employment and contracting.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="399"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/04/01-4056.htm">01-4056 -- TIMPANOGOS TRIBE V. CONWAY -- 04/15/2002<BR></A><BR>
Are the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="399"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/07/96-6278.htm">96-6278 -- KIOWA INDIAN TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA V. HOOVER -- 07/13/1998<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judge. <p> <strong><hr align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="398"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/02/97-2289.htm">97-2289 -- U.S. V. KRAMER -- 02/17/1999<BR></A><BR>
Kramer contends that his guilty plea was involuntary. He asserts that he was ill when his plea was taken and consequently did not understand the ramifications of his plea. He further contends that his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to investigate adequately the facts of his case before his plea or trial. P. 32(e) of establishing that there was a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="396"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/05/96-6219.htm">96-6219 -- CITIZEN BAND POTAWATOMI INDIAN TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA V. COLLIER -- 05/05/1998<BR></A><BR>
Seeking a declaration that the BIA is required to obtain the Tribe's consent before placing into trust land within the boundaries of the former Potawatomi reservation. The lawsuit was precipitated when the Absentee Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma (Absentee Shawnee Tribe) applied to the BIA to place such land in trust and the BIA informed the Potawatomi Tribe that its consent was not required under the relevant statute and regulations. Holding that a prior ruling on the matter by the Interior Board of Indian Appeals (IBIA) for the Absentee Shawnee Tribe was contrary to law. Appeals and we affirm.<a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="393"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/oct95/94-2271.html">SCRIVNER V. TANSY<BR></A><BR>
Was robbed by three men and one woman. The Griswolds were accosted in their home across the street where three of them were tied up at gunpoint. Griswold was then escorted to the store where he opened the safe. Scrivner was not at the scene and was never identified by any of the victims as one of the assailants. Johnson was the only prosecution witness at Scrivner's trial who identified Scrivner as a participant in the crime. The only physical evidence presented at trial which linked Scrivner to the robbery was two walkie talkies. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. 2 The district court denied Scrivner a certificate of probable cause. Who was identified by Johnson as Scrivner. Which was used as the shop van. Was at the scene. He was sentenced to two consecutive ten year terms of imprisonment plus two years' parole on counts I and III.3 Sentences on the other counts were imposed to run concurrently with the two ten year terms. Scrivner later filed state petitions for habeas corpus which were denied.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="392"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/00/10/993332P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Was diabetic and overweight at the time of delivery. She was approximately five feet tall. The delivery was uncomplicated. She was scheduled for discharge just a few days following the birth of her child. The Weasels filed a response informing the court that the medical records were submitted to one physician and two registered nurses and that their findings were about to be submitted. That the financial assistance
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="392"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/02/02/012521P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
At least two members of the Task Force were already positioned at Milk's residence before Black Feather arrived. The Task Force was surveilling Milk's residence because the intercepted package. Aroused the officers' suspicions that Milk was involved in this drug conspiracy. He was standing within arm's length of the parcel which was lying open on the kitchen table. Milk's residence was a house trailer parked on a piece of property owned by the Oglala Sioux Tribe and managed by the Oglala Sioux Housing Authority (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="391"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/012288.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Because the Board Decision is supported by substantial evidence. It contends that it should have been permitted to litigate the qualifications of the discriminatees before the ALJ.2 In order to properly assess these claims. He also found that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="389"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1997/12/96-4150.htm">96-4150 -- U.S. V. MURDOCK -- 12/20/1997<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judges. <p> <hr align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="388"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/08/003615P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The relevant facts are largely undisputed. The parties agree that superintendents are not among those officials designated to authorize contracts requiring Section 81 approval. As the Agreements were not authorized by a duly empowered individual. The Agreements were void ab initio. Given its conclusion that the Agreements were properly authorized. Also argue that the Agreements are not subject to its requirements. Was filed under the unamended statute. 3 II. The Court held
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="388"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1997/10/96-4150a.htm">96-4150A -- U.S. V. MURDOCK -- 10/20/1997<BR></A><BR>
Is incorrectly attributed. The correct citation for the quote is <u>Chapoose v. Utah 1985).<a name=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="388"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/07/96-3250a.htm">96-3250A -- ANR PIPELINE CO. AND COLORADO INTERSTATE GAS CO. V. LAFAVER -- 07/21/1998<BR></A><BR>
Is a <p> member of the firm Morris. Two and three of the opinion are attached for your convenience. <p> Sincerely. The plaintiffs' suit is not saved by the <u>Ex parte Young</u> doctrine. <p align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="388"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/07/96-3250.htm">96-3250 -- ANR PIPELINE CO. AND COLORADO INTERSTATE GAS CO. V. LAFAVER -- 07/21/1998<BR></A><BR>
The plaintiffs' suit is not saved by the <u>Ex parte Young</u> doctrine. <p align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="387"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199810/97-5290a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs was Joseph H. With her on the brief were Lois J. Was on the brief for amicus curiae Patrick J. Were on the brief for amicus curiae Lincoln C. Aboriginal inhabitants of what is now Rhode Island. The Tribe was drawn into bloody warfare with Puritan colonists seeking to gain political authority over much of Rhode Island by securing claims to Indian land. The Settlement Act specifi cally stated that Narragansett settlement lands are
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="386"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTM4MjMtY3YgdyBFcnJhdGEucGRm/05-3823-cv%20w%20Errata.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The district court lacked jurisdiction because the action was not brought as an appeal of an agency decision pursuant to IGRA § 2714. We hold that the district court was without jurisdiction to entertain the action and we affirm the dismissal. The other half shall be paid into the Treasury for the use of the Indian or tribe by or for whom it was so paid. 3 Management Company (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="386"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1997/10/96-4150.htm">96-4150 -- U.S. V. MURDOCK -- 10/20/1997<BR></A><BR>
Chief Judge. <p> Perry Von Murdock was charged with violating 18 U.S.C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="386"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTM4MjMtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/05-3823-cv_opn.pdf">MICROSOFT WORD - 05 CV 3823 U.S. V. ST. REGIS MOHAWK FINAL.DOC<BR></A><BR>
The district court lacked jurisdiction because the action was not brought as an appeal of an agency decision pursuant to IGRA § 2714. We hold that the district court was without jurisdiction to entertain the action and we affirm the dismissal. The other half shall be paid into the Treasury for the use of the Indian or tribe by or for whom it was so paid. 3 Management Company (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="386"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTM4MjMtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/05-3823-cv_opn.pdf">MICROSOFT WORD - 05 CV 3823 U.S. V. ST. REGIS MOHAWK FINAL.DOC<BR></A><BR>
The district court lacked jurisdiction because the action was not brought as an appeal of an agency decision pursuant to IGRA § 2714. We hold that the district court was without jurisdiction to entertain the action and we affirm the dismissal. The other half shall be paid into the Treasury for the use of the Indian or tribe by or for whom it was so paid. 3 Management Company (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="385"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/oct97/96-4150.wpd.html">UNITED STATES V. VON MURDOCK<BR></A><BR>
Is incorrectly attributed. The correct citation for the quote is Chapoose v. In addition please note that this is not an internal quote. A corrected copy is enclosed. Perry Von Murdock was charged with violating 18 U.S.C. 1165. He moved to dismiss the charge on the ground that he is an Indian with inherent rights to hunt and fish on the land in question. Although the Act was passed in 1954. The historical background leading up to the passage of the UTA is comprehensively set out in Hackford. The purpose of the Act was to divide and distribute
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="385"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=95-1922.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Ropes & Gray were on brief. Were on brief. It is necessary to juxtapose the Gaming Act and the Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act of 1980. The arrangement was designed to transform the legal status of the Maine tribes (the Passamaquoddy Tribe and the Penobscot Nation). Unless such provision of such subsequently enacted Federal law is specifically made applicable within the State of Maine. 25 U.S.C. 1735(b) (emphasis supplied). The Settlement Act and the Gaming Act are vastly different in scope. The former is narrower in the sense that it applies only in Maine whereas the latter has national implications. The Settlement Act is broader in that it purposes to cover virtually the entire field of relationships between the State and the Indian tribes based there whereas the Gaming Act concentrates exclusively on a particular kind of activity. If we were to start and stop with the Gaming Act. The Tribe which is federally recognized and self governing would be home free. The chief objective of statutory interpretation is to give effect to the legislative will.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="385"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/07/01-4020.htm">01-4020 -- UTE DISTRIBUTION CORP. V. NORTON -- 07/25/2002<BR></A><BR>
1291 and affirm. <p> <center><u>Background</u></center> <p> The central issue of the underlying litigation is the effect of the Ute Partition and Termination Act (UPA). Was part of the federal government's then current policy of terminating its supervisory responsibilities for Indian tribes. <em>See Ute Distribution Corp. v. 92 S.Ct. 1456 (1972)).<a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="385"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/01/97-9556a.htm">97-9556A -- HRI, INC. V. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY -- 01/06/2000<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judges. <p> <hr align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="383"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/06-5059.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the brief was Lisa M. Of counsel on the brief was Daniel I.S.J. With him on the brief was Sue Ellen Wooldridge. The threshold question in this case is whether the Navajo Nation (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="383"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/01/97-9556.htm">97-9556 -- HRI, INC. V. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY -- 01/06/2000<BR></A><BR>
The effect of state adjudications against a tribe on EPA's authority to assess whether lands are Indian country. Dismissing in part and remanding in part. <p align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="383"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/7E4905B72644600B88256F400080891F/$file/0256943.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Tribe seeks a determination that vehicles operated by its Public Safety Department are
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="382"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAyLTYxMTEgdyAybmQgRXJyYXRhLnBkZg==/02-6111%20w%202nd%20Errata.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We hold that plaintiffs' possessory land claim is subject to the defense of laches and conclude that the claim must be barred on that basis. Circuit Judge: We are here confronted by land claims of historic vintage the wrongs alleged occurred over two hundred years ago. This action is itself twenty five years old which we must adjudicate against a legal backdrop that has evolved since the District Court's rulings. Determined (1) that treaties between the Cayuga Nation and the State of New York in 1795 and 1807 were not properly ratified by the federal government and were thus invalid under the Nonintercourse Act. That plaintiffs were entitled to about $211 million in prejudgment interest. We conclude that the possessory land claim alleged here is the type of claim to which a laches defense can be applied. We further conclude that plaintiffs' claim is barred by laches. Historical Background Plaintiffs allege that from time immemorial until the late eighteenth century the Cayuga Nation owned and occupied approximately three million acres of land in what is now New York State.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="382"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/09/974397P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. Weaselhead is an adult Indian male and an enrolled member of the Blackfeet Indian Tribe of Montana. He is not a member of the Winnebago Tribe domiciled in that state. This relationship was brought to the attention of tribal authorities. Weaselhead was arraigned in Winnebago Tribal Court on charges of sexual assault. Although the tribe was apparently aware that Weaselhead and the girl had engaged in sexual acts on more than one occasion. The indictment only charged conduct alleged to have occurred on March 15. The remaining charges were then dismissed. 100 of which were suspended. He was indicted by a federal grand jury on a charge of engaging in a sexual act with an Indian female juvenile in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2243 and 1153 (1997). The tribal court was exercising jurisdiction over the defendant which flowed from a delegation of power from Congress and a subsequent prosecution by the federal government for the same offense is barred by the Fifth Amendment. Holding that the Double Jeopardy Clause was not implicated because the dual prosecution of Weaselhead was undertaken by separate sovereigns.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="382"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/075FC67D01D1D7E6882570370081963B/$file/0316940.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The district court held that the programs at issue are not
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="382"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/4D84EB48646C599D88256A4F005B6B5D/$file/9955229.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. The essential facts of this case are undisputed. The Cabazon Indian Reservation is located in Southern California. It is not possible to drive between the different parcels without leaving the reservation. Only such
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="382"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/5188EBB16588034C88256E5A00707B4D/$file/9955229.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. The essential facts of this case are undisputed. The Cabazon Indian Reservation is located in Southern California. It is not possible to drive between the different parcels without leaving the reservation. Only such
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="382"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAyLTYxMTFfb3BuLnBkZg==/02-6111_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We hold that plaintiffs' possessory land claim is subject to the defense of laches and conclude that the claim must be barred on that basis. Circuit Judge: We are here confronted by land claims of historic vintage the wrongs alleged occurred over two hundred years ago. This action is itself twenty five years old which we must adjudicate against a legal backdrop that has evolved since the District Court's rulings. Determined (1) that treaties between the Cayuga Nation and the State of New York in 1795 and 1807 were not properly ratified by the federal government and were thus invalid under the Nonintercourse Act. That plaintiffs were entitled to about $211 million in prejudgment interest. We conclude that the possessory land claim alleged here is the type of claim to which a laches defense can be applied. We further conclude that plaintiffs' claim is barred by laches. The Cayuga Nation owned and occupied approximately three million acres of land in what is now New York State. Successive versions of the Act have been continuously in force from that time to the present day.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="380"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/992459.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Concluding that these State parties were indispensable parties under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19. Are subject to review by State public service commissions and thereafter. The parties found themselves in a dispute over whether Bell Atlantic had to pay reciprocal compensation for its subscribers' telephone calls made to Internet Service Providers (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="380"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/03/03/013695P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Billy Jo Lara was indicted by the federal government for assault on a federal officer in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 111(a)(1). Lara was arrested for public intoxication by Bureau of Indian Affairs police officers. Who is not a member of the Spirit Lake Nation. Lara was charged with five violations of Spirit Lake Tribal Code: violence to a policeman. Lara pled guilty to the first three charged offenses and was sentenced to a jail term of 155 days. The right to be free from multiple prosecutions is limited by the dual sovereignty doctrine. Thus a second prosecution is not for
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="379"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/08/001819P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Devils Lake is a large. A brief overview of the facts at this juncture will serve to frame our discussion. The proper interpretation is critical. If the boundary is the northern shore. The 1867 treaty is ambiguous. The government claims that Devils Lake was not included in the 1867 treaty that formed the reservation. The court held that the Tribe's suit against the federal government was time barred. 1814 (2001) (distinguishing claim preclusion and issue preclusion). 4 1 Devils Lake because the Tribe could have raised that issue (but did not) in a 1951 ICC suit. The court determined that the government was an indispensable party to the proceedings. That QTA relief is not available because the Tribe failed to comply with the pertinent statute of limitations. Which provides that an
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="378"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/12/97-8079.htm">97-8079 -- ORDINANCE 59 ASSOCIATION V. UNITED STATES DEPT.OF THE INTERIOR SECRETARY -- 12/01/1998<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judge. <p> <hr align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="373"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/09/99-2011.htm">99-2011 -- NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD V. PUEBLO OF SAN JUAN -- 09/26/2000<BR></A><BR>
</strong>District Judge. <p> <hr align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="372"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/09/99-2011a.htm">99-2011A -- NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD V. SAN JUAN -- 09/26/2000<BR></A><BR>
2000 <p> The court's slip opinion is corrected as follows: <ol> <li> On page 5. The word
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="372"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/01/961692P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Tribe brought The Tribe also Since this action to enjoin the State from enforcing its hunting and fishing laws over any person within the boundaries of the Reservation. sought declaratory relief that the State is barred from exercising any regulatory authority over hunting or fishing within the Reservation. important decisions relating to this litigation began in 1980. The district court determined that this action is substantially controlled by South Dakota v. This agreement was not a five year cooperation agreement. renewed. Arguing both that there are disputed material facts that make summary judgment inappropriate and that the court erred as a matter of law in determining that the State has exclusive jurisdiction to regulate hunting and fishing on non trust lands within the Reservation. Is contained in Lower Brule I. The Lower Brule Sioux Reservation was established as part of a March 2. Dakota in northeastern The Reservation is situated in central South Lyman County and extends slightly into the The Reservation is bounded on the The original area of the southeastern corner of Stanley County. northeast and east by the Missouri River.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="372"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=05-4295.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Although the decision to enforce a non final tribal court judgment is a matter of discretion. Federal courts will ordinarily err on the side of enforcement of such judgments in the name of comity. We will not enforce a tribal court judgment. The regulatory authority of the tribe is often the issue which looms largest. This case is no exception. These appeals require us to examine the regulatory authority of the Navajo Nation over the activities of a nonmember of the tribe when the regulated entity is another independent sovereign acting in its governmental capacity. Although the district court's judgment was ultimately in their favor. The preliminary injunction is interlocutory in nature. Much of the preliminary injunction is now moot. Defendants are nearly all entitled to sovereign immunity. The specific defendants in that case relevant to these appeals were as follows: San Juan County. SJHSD is a special service district organized pursuant to Utah Code § 17A 2 1304 (1999). Is tasked with providing health care services to the citizens of San Juan County.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="371"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/001481.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Because a state's sovereign immunity is not so fleeting as to depend upon the forum in which the state is sued. The judgment of the FMC is reversed and the case is remanded with directions to dismiss it. Passengers may gamble on board the ship while it is in international waters. The South Carolina State Ports Authority has a policy of refusing to berth ships whose primary purpose is gambling. Only so long as gambling is not their primary purpose. The SCSPA refused to give the M/V TROPIC SEA a berthing space at the port of Charleston because it claimed the ship's primary purpose was to facilitate gambling. Believing that it was being singled out for unfair treatment. This court held that the SCSPA is protected by South Carolina's sovereign immunity because it is an arm of the state. The doctrine that a sovereign could not be sued without its consent was universal in the States when the Constitution was drafted and ratified.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="370"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200707/06-5354a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="370"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/apr96/94-3428.wpd.html">KAUL V. STEPHAN<BR></A><BR>
After learning that the Kansas Department of Revenue believed Kaul was violating state taxation laws. When the investigation revealed that Kaul did not have a valid sales tax identification number. Even if Stephan's actions were unconstitutional. He was shielded by qualified immunity. Which is located within the Prairie Band Potawatomi Indian Reservation in Jackson County. She alleged that she was exempt from sales tax because her store would operate on an Indian Reservation. The Department of Revenue did not issue Kaul a sales tax identification number because the department's policy at the time was that retailers operating on Indian reservations were exempt from the requirement of collecting and remitting Kansas retailers' sales tax. Such an exemption was not enumerated in the Kansas Retailers' Sales Tax Act. The rev enue department officials told Stephan that they believed Kaul was in violation of Kansas tax statutes and subject to prosecution under Kansas' criminal tax statutes. Nor did they tell Stephan that Kaul had applied for a tax identification number and that no number was issued because the department considered her exempt.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="369"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/1569E8D5C8B6740788257225004FAF7A/$file/0436167.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Because the Tribes do not have a cognizable non APA claim. We agree with the district court that the Tribes are required to comply with the APA's
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="368"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//sept2000/99-13669.man.html">MICCOSUKEE TRIBE OF INDIANS OF FLORIDA V. FLORIDA STATE ATHLETIC COMM'N (9/13/2000, NO. 99-13669)<BR></A><BR>
The district court also found that the Florida Commission was entitled to Eleventh Amendment Immunity. Background</EM></CENTER> </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="368"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/sept2000/99-13669.man.html">MICCOSUKEE TRIBE OF INDIANS OF FLORIDA V. FLORIDA STATE ATHLETIC COMM'N (9/13/2000, NO. 99-13669)<BR></A><BR>
The district court also found that the Florida Commission was entitled to Eleventh Amendment Immunity. Background</EM></CENTER> </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="368"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/jan97/96-2162.wpd.html">PUEBLO OF SANTA ANA V. KELLY<BR></A><BR>
Give life to a compact which was void from its inception because the state governor who signed the compact lacked the authority under state law to sign on behalf of the state. Vivify that which was never alive. Pueblo of Taos are federally recognized Indian tribes in New Mexico. Plaintiff and appellant San Felipe Gaming Enterprise Board is a gaming enterprise chartered under the laws of the Pueblo of San Felipe.(1) The Tribes have been operating casinos and other gaming facilities in New Mexico. Lacked the authority to do so and at least suggested that New Mexico law did not permit the kind of gambling they were conducting. Seeking a declaration that the Tribes were conducting gambling in violation of federal and state law. Joined the State of New Mexico as a party.(2) (1) We will hereafter refer to the Pueblo tribes as the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="364"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/08/98-7057a.htm">98-7057A -- U.S. V. ROBERTS -- 08/03/1999<BR></A><BR>
13 of the original version. <p> A corrected copy of the opinion is attached for your convenience with the proper citations. <p> Very truly yours. Hollis Earl Roberts was charged in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma with two counts of aggravated sexual abuse in violation of 18 U.S.C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="364"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/08/98-7057.htm">98-7057 -- U.S. V. ROBERTS -- 08/03/1999<BR></A><BR>
Hollis Earl Roberts was charged in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma with two counts of aggravated sexual abuse in violation of 18 U.S.C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="364"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/12/96-3343a.htm">96-3343A -- ELLIS V. UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS MEDICAL CENTER -- 12/21/1998<BR></A><BR>
Is corrected as follows. The statutory citations are corrected to read
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="364"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/12/96-3343.htm">96-3343 -- ELLIS V. UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS MEDICAL CENTER -- 12/21/1998<BR></A><BR>
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="362"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/july97/94-1579.wpd.html">SOUTHERN UTE INDIAN TRIBE V. AMOCO PROD. CO.<BR></A><BR>
Which entities have not obtained ) tribal consent to and federal approval of said explora ) tion. ) for lands located within the exterior boundaries of the ) Southern Ute Indian Reservation and which class ) members have not obtained tribal consent to and ) federal approval of said interests of rights. 2) (1) Our reversal will require the district court to address the defenses asserted by defendants to preclude recovery by the Tribe. 2) a declaratory judgment that Tribal consent is required for CBM extraction. Two issues were identified as fundamental to the resolution of all claims against the Amoco defendants: 1) the determination of CBM ownership. Amoco was designated as representative of the class and. The district court held that CBM ownership was vested unambiguously in the Amoco defendants. Or reach the federal defendants' claims that the Tribe's action was barred by the statute of limitations. It is from these rulings that the Tribe appeals.(2) II. The single issue which is determinative of this appeal is whether the Tribe.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="360"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/8303E5DF3879933888257077004F85C1/$file/0335911.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Cigarette tax contracts must provide that the state will not impose any tax. Joan Wilbur are enrolled members of the Tribe and the operators of a retail store located on trust land within the Swinomish Indian Reservation. LOCKE 12849 (State) alleging that the State and the Tribe were negotiating a cigarette tax contract. The Tribe was not named as a defendant. 43.06.460 are
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="358"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/09/001094P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Tribe also argues that the district court erred because the award failed to draw its essence from the agreement between the parties and is contrary to public policy. MRS was responsible for securing the necessary funds to construct the casino. Article VI provided that MRS was
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="358"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/03/954263P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
This case involves the tax status of land within an Indian reservation which was once alienated from Indian ownership and subsequently reacquired by the tribe in fee simple. Minnesota levied an ad valorem tax on such fee land owned by the Leech Lake Band of The Band paid the taxes under protest and sought a declaratory judgment that the land is immune from state taxation. I. The Leech Lake Band of Chippewa Indians is a federally recognized Indian tribe. Whose reservation is located in northern Minnesota. The reservation was created by a series of treaties with the United States government. The Band's original reservation was impacted by changes in federal Indian policy. See The purpose of the policy was to open land to non Indians and to assimilate the Indian The overall effect Id. at was drastically to reduce the amount of land under Indian control. The legislative centerpiece of the allotment policy was the General Allotment Act (GAA). Parcels of land to be granted to individual Indians were initially held in trust by the United States.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="357"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1997/12/96-2156.htm">96-2156 -- MESCALERO APACHE TRIBE V. STATE OF NEW MEXICO -- 12/10/1997<BR></A><BR>
The validity of which is an issue in this case. The present appeal is from the district court's denial of the Tribe's motion to strike the State's Eleventh Amendment immunity defense. We affirm. <p align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="356"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/53DE6372E58D839988256BDE00807572/$file/0030337.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We hold that the criminal statute under which he was charged the Indian Major Crimes Act (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="355"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/mar99/97-5812.man.html">RODRIGUEZ V. UNITED STATES (3/15/1999, NO. 97-5812)<BR></A><BR>
Which is more formally known as the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. The plaintiffs are a class of aliens who do not fit within any of the eligible categories. THE WELFARE REFORM ACT'S PROVISIONS AFFECTING THE ELIGIBILITY OF ALIENS</CENTER> FOR SSI AND FOOD STAMP WELFARE BENEFITS</P> <P> The federal government provides SSI benefits to impoverished individuals who are elderly. Aliens were eligible for both SSI and food stamp benefits on the same basis as citizens. The Act provides that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="355"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/00opinions/00-5086.html">NAVAJO NATION V. U.S.<BR></A><BR>
For plaintiff appellant.</span></span><span style='mso bidi font family:Arial'><span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>Of counsel on the brief was <u>Daniel I.S.J. <span class=SpellE>Rey</span> Bear</u>. For defendant <span class=SpellE>appellee</span>.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>With him on the brief were <u>R. Attorneys.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>Of counsel was <u>Elizabeth Ann Peterson</u>. Et al.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>Of counsel were <u>William F. <span class=SpellE><span class=GramE>Coffield</span></span></u><span class=GramE><span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>and</span> <u>Terrance G. The court held that the government was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span><u>Id.<o:p></o:p></u></p> <p class=MsoNormal style='line height:200%'><span style='mso tab count:1'> </span>The Tribe appealed to us.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>We reversed and remanded. <u>Mitchell I</u> and <u>Mitchell II</u> are the path marking precedents on the question of whether a statute or regulation (or combination thereof) 'can fairly be interpreted as mandating compensation by the Federal Government.'".
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="355"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/0D1EC2F0EAE243B288256F0200589D7A/$file/0315423.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Who is Cholla's sole shareholder. The Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) granted a commercial source numThe background is drawn primarily from the complaint. Woodruff Butte was declared eligible for listing on the NRHP in or around 1990. The federal defendants were dismissed by the parties' joint stipulation. The state officials are the only remaining defendants in the case. 2 CHOLLA READY MIX v. The court is not required to accept legal conclusions cast in the form of factual allegations if those conclusions cannot reasonably be drawn from the facts alleged.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="355"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19975812.MAN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Which is more formally known as the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. The plaintiffs are a class of aliens who do not fit within any of the eligible categories. Because no members of the plaintiff class are illegal aliens. We will for convenience use the term
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="355"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/06/042206P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
K.P. was born October 8. Was born on October 20. Who was twelve years old. Which stated Plumman was touching P.P. Nothing was going on. P.P. was sorry. Sandra noticed K.P.'s bedroom door was closed. K.P. was awake and lying under the bed covers. Sandra asked Plumman what he was doing in the bedroom. Plumman replied he was trying to fix something. P.P. was attending the He Dog School and requested to see the school counselor. From the time she was about eleven years old. K.P. also cried during her interview and was unable to tell investigators whether Plumman had 3 penetrated her or ejaculated. The investigators determined the girls were not safe in their home. The investigators went to Plumman's house to take protective custody of the two younger siblings and to explain to Plumman why the children were being removed from the home. Also testified Plumman asked her what was going to happen now. Agent McGrane advised Plumman he was not under arrest and he would not be arrested when the agents were done talking with him.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="355"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19975812.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Which is more formally known as the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. The plaintiffs are a class of aliens who do not fit within any of the eligible categories. Because no members of the plaintiff class are illegal aliens. We will for convenience use the term
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="355"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//mar99/97-5812.man.html">RODRIGUEZ V. UNITED STATES (3/15/1999, NO. 97-5812)<BR></A><BR>
Which is more formally known as the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. The plaintiffs are a class of aliens who do not fit within any of the eligible categories. THE WELFARE REFORM ACT'S PROVISIONS AFFECTING THE ELIGIBILITY OF ALIENS</CENTER> FOR SSI AND FOOD STAMP WELFARE BENEFITS</P> <P> The federal government provides SSI benefits to impoverished individuals who are elderly. Aliens were eligible for both SSI and food stamp benefits on the same basis as citizens. The Act provides that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="353"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/07/94-1579.htm">94-1579 -- SOUTHERN UTE INDIAN TRIBE V. AMOCO PRODUCTION CO. -- 07/20/1998<BR></A><BR>
) <p> for lands located within the exterior boundaries of the ) <p> Southern Ute Indian Reservation and which class ) <p> members have not obtained tribal consent to and ) <p> federal approval of said interests of rights. Which entities ) <p> have not obtained tribal consent to and federal ) <p> approval of said exploration. 2) a declaratory judgment that Tribal consent is required for CBM extraction. Sought injunctive relief to prevent the federal defendants from issuing permits to explore for and extract CBM under oil and gas leases or from otherwise acquiescing in the derogation of the Tribe's alleged ownership interest in CBM. <p> Two issues were identified as fundamental to the resolution of all claims against the Amoco defendants: 1) the determination of CBM ownership. Amoco was designated as representative of the class and. The Tribe brought a cross motion for summary judgment on the issue of CBM ownership. <p> The district court held that CBM ownership was vested unambiguously in the Amoco defendants. <u>Southern Ute Indian Tribe v.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="351"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/08/99-4210a.htm">99-4210A -- U.S. V. HARDMAN -- 08/08/2001<BR></A><BR>
The panel opinions in these cases are vacated. It is anticipated that these cases will be reheard during the Court's November 2001 Term. <p> We request that the attorneys in each case brief and prepare to orally argue the issues listed below to the extent they are applicable to their case.<a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="351"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/1257B4A0E455128D882571E600582243/$file/0215475.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The California Court of Appeal's findings are
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="349"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/01/952529P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Codified The excise tax is The HONORABLE BRUCE M. A person shall pay an excise tax at the rate of three percent on the purchase price of any motor vehicle . . . purchased or acquired for use on the streets and highways of this state and required to be registered under the 2 a one time assessment collected by the county in which the owner resides when the vehicle is first licensed in the state. Payment of the excise tax is required for the issuance or transfer of state vehicle title. Is thus a condition precedent to registration and issuance of state license plates.2 state highway fund. misdemeanor. The proceeds are allocated to the Failure to pay the excise tax is a South Dakota Codified Laws section 32 5 5 imposes a separate motor vehicle registration fee on state residents. 5 5. 3 S.D. Codified Laws Ann. § 32 The annual fee is based on the weight of the vehicle and ranges from $20 to $40 for average noncommercial laws of this state. Failure to pay the full amount of excise tax is a Class 1 misdemeanor. Which is not challenged by the parties in this case. 3 2 The statute provides: Subject to the provisions of §§ 32 5 17 to 32 5 45.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="349"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=98-1326.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Sample was on brief for appellant. The question before us is whether the decision of the Penobscot Nation Tribal Council to terminate the employment of a community health nurse constitutes an
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="348"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/A8587157E55117EA88256EED006D3931/$file/0217224.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We affirm the district court's judgment because the regulation at issue is reasonably related to legitimate penological interests. We find that the AIRFA is simply a policy statement and does not create a cause of action or any judicially enforceable individual rights. I Henderson is a Native American of mixed ancestry who is currently incarcerated in California. The district court found that Henderson sincerely believes that his hair is sacred. To have his hair cut otherwise is considered a form of defilement. There is no religious exemption. II Whether California's hair length regulation impermissibly restricts Henderson's First Amendment right is a mixed ques 11136 HENDERSON v. The constitutional question Henderson has raised requires de novo review because
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="348"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/99/01/981520P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Tribe is federally registered and resides on a reservation in Idaho. Begin gambling once the account is funded. The Tribe offers the lottery to residents of thirty six States who have Internet access. Counsel for UniStar argued the US Lottery is lawful nationwide but appellees made the business decision to lower legal costs during start up by not offering it in States with strong policies against gambling. Two States whose Attorneys General have commenced litigation. Seeking to enjoin operation of the lottery because Internet gambling is illegal in Missouri and therefore the Tribe is violating state law by offering unlawful services and falsely advertising that the lottery is legal in Missouri. Arguing the US Lottery is not gambling on
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="348"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-4274.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Both parcels are located south of the Bloomington Exit on the east side of I 15 in the City. The City's manager allegedly refused to provide such a letter because the City was
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="347"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=99-1828.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Jefferson Melish</U> was on brief. The scope of that jurisdiction was narrow. The Authority and plaintiff appellant Ninigret Development Corporation (Ninigret) a Rhode Island business corporation in which a member of the Tribe apparently is a principal embarked upon a series of business transactions.</FONT></P> <P><FONT FACE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="346"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200412/03-5262a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="346"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/11/98-1127.htm">98-1127 -- U.S. V. HESS -- 11/05/1999<BR></A><BR>
At issue is whether the reservation of
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="345"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/05/051895P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
South Dakota is a city of 1. The city is divided into three. Their election was uncontested. The complaint alleged that the city wards were configured in a manner that intentionally and effectively diluted the voting strength of Native Americans and kept Indianpreferred aldermen candidates from being elected. It shall develop a plan under which NativeAmericans will have a reasonable opportunity to elect an Indian preferred candidate. Protests were held to end a racially offensive homecoming tradition that depicted Native Americans in a demeaning. After the new wards were drawn and published as Ordinance 121. New districts were drawn to address the one person. Since there was not sufficient evidence to prove a vote dilution or
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="344"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/03/08/032329P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
These consolidated appeals involve the intersection of an issue that is subject to federal regulation. With an issue that is subject to tribal control. A Tribal Constitution approved by the Secretary of the Interior in 1937 provides that the Tribe is to be governed by an elected Tribal Council. Members of the Tribe who were dissatisfied with the conduct of the Elected Council alleged illegal conduct by the Elected Council and circulated petitions to seek a special election to recall the entire council. The Elected Council claims that some of the signatures were forged. The Elected Council does not claim to have conducted an investigation to determine if there were 243 valid signatures. The Elected Council states only that it was satisfied that the irregularities were sufficient not to warrant a recall election. 2 Because the Tribal Constitution grants to the Tribal Council dispute resolution powers and the duty to call a special election. There is no separate Tribal body to which the petitioners may appeal the Elected Council's action other than the Elected Council itself.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="343"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/12/98-2040.htm">98-2040 -- U.S. V. PRENTISS -- 12/06/2001<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judge. <p> The defendant Ricco Prentiss was convicted after a jury trial of arson in Indian country. (2) that the indictment's deficiency was not subject to review for harmless error. <u>See</u> <u>United States v. A majority of this court agreed with the panel's conclusion that the status of the victim and that of the defendant are essential elements of the crime of arson in Indian country under 18 U.S.C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/new/release.pl?B1=Search+Month&month=08&date=01&year=01">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/11/02-1212.htm">02-1212 -- U.S. V. HESS -- 11/12/2003<BR></A><BR>
The purpose of the Act was to dismantle the Ute reservation. Non allotted lands to public entry and settlement was the Stock Raising Homestead Act of 1916. This Act provided for the settlement of homesteads on lands where the surface was deemed
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//june99/96-5262.opn.html">TAMIAMI PARTNERS V. MICCOSUKEE TRIBE OF INDIANS (6/7/1999, NO. 96-5262)<BR></A><BR>
Which is making its third appearance before our court. <A HREF=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="342"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/june99/96-5262.opn.html">TAMIAMI PARTNERS V. MICCOSUKEE TRIBE OF INDIANS (6/7/1999, NO. 96-5262)<BR></A><BR>
Which is making its third appearance before our court. <A HREF=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="341"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/01/971546P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Which authorizes class III gaming activities on Indian lands1 provided that such activities are permitted under a tribal
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="340"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/aug95/94-4403.man_fn.html">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 ></head><body><a name=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="340"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//aug95/94-4403.man_fn.html">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 ></head><body><a name=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="338"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/06/972718P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is valid. The following is an outline of the factual and procedural history relevant to the court's opinion in this case. The Tribe was not represented at the hearing. The Tribe acknowledged receipt of the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="338"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=05-3085.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Any gaming on Indian land must be approved by the National Indian Gaming (1) This order and judgment is not binding precedent. Which approval is subject to judicial review. After the Joint Stipulation was made. It was in response to our decision in the Kansas case that the DOI issued its Opinion Letter. Because our jurisdiction is limited to review of final agency action and because the federal government has not waived its sovereign immunity to judicial enforcement of the Joint Stipulation. A fuller treatment of this history is available in the published opinions from the earlier cases. The district court noted that the Tribe had left the Reserve by the 1870s and that Congress expressly abrogated any claim the Tribe might have to the Reserve no later than 1924. The present owners of the Reserve were admitted to the Tribe as members. On appeal to the district court the case was remanded to the NIGC because the commission
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="337"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/08/962975P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Tribe further argues that Governor Nelson is subject to suit pursuant to the doctrine of Ex parte Young .2 We affirm. I. The IGRA was enacted in 1988 for the purpose of providing a statutory basis for the operation and regulation of Indian gaming. Indian gaming is divided into three classes. Class III (all other forms of gaming that are not class I or class II gaming). Section 2710 describes those situations where class III gaming is legal. Any Indian tribe having jurisdiction over Indian lands where class III gaming is being conducted. Or is to be conducted. The Supreme Court recognized that suits may be brought in federal court against a state official in his official capacity where prospective injunctive relief is sought to end a continuing violation of federal law. 255 (8th Cir. 1995)). 2 2 lands are located to enter into negotiations for the purpose of entering into a TribalState compact governing such class III gaming. The state is required to negotiate in good faith with the Indian tribe to enter into such a compact.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="337"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/03/03-2323.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. Background Plaintiffs are three federally recognized Indian Tribes with reservations in sparsely populated areas of northern Wisconsin (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="335"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/06/963618P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Magill was an active judge at the time this case was submitted and assumed senior status on April 1. Before the opinion was filed. 1 2 MAGILL. I. The Spirit Lake Sioux Tribe2 (Tribe) is a federally recognized Indian Tribe which occupies the Fort Totten Reservation (Reservation). Approximately three fourths of the reservation is held in fee by non tribal members. 000 acres are either held in trust for the Tribe by the United States. 958 (D.N.D. 1995) (Devils Lake). 2 The Spirit Lake Sioux Tribe was previously known as the Devils Lake Sioux 3 Tribe. Electricity consumers on the Reservation have received electrical services from three utilities companies: (1) Otter Tail. The North Dakota Public Service Commission (NDPSC) is a state administrative body which regulates investorowned electric utilities in North Dakota. Alleging that the NDPSC did not have jurisdiction over the Reservation. Because the Tribe was not a party to the proceedings. The court held 5 that Otter Tail did not have standing to argue that the NDPSC's assertion of jurisdiction over the Reservation would impair tribal sovereignty.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="335"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200601/05-5206a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the brief were Daniel P. With her on the brief was Elizabeth A. With him on the brief were Matthew T. The Tribe was administratively terminated in 1935. When its application for recognition was denied under the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="334"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/02/06/012024P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
States: th 1 of law in concluding there was no management agreement. 2711.2 The Tribe and Casino Magic agreed that such approval was a 25 U.S.C. § 81 governs all contracts with an Indian tribe whereby the tribe trades consideration for
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="334"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9ADD9D7E47C1097B88257344005879D0/$file/0515585.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Concurrence by Judge Wallace *Mike Johanns is substituted for his predecessor. Is sitting by designation. 10525 10528 THE ACCESS FUND v. Is many things to many people. It is a site of powerful religious and cultural signifi THE ACCESS FUND v. Cave Rock is a culturally. Native Americans who have lived in the Tahoe area for at least 1500 years. Traditional Washoe view Cave Rock as the site of important mythological events that are central to their cosmology. It is also a symbol of their cultural and religious identity. Cave Rock is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="334"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/1A13E9202F4128F888256B35005EAC07/$file/0016787.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We have jurisdiction over Dawavendewa's timely appeal. We conclude the Nation is a necessary party that cannot be joined because it enjoys tribal sovereign immunity. The Nation itself is indispensable to this suit. Semi skilled and skilled local Navajo labor is not available. Or the quality of work of available skilled or semi skilled workmen is not acceptable to Lessees. Because Dawavendewa is not affiliated with the Nation. He was never interviewed for the Operator Trainee position. They are not parties to this litigation. Holding that the Indian preferences 3 The Indian Preferences exemption codified at 42 U.S.C. § 2000e 2(i) states: Nothing contained in this subchapter shall apply to any business or enterprise on or near an Indian reservation with respect to any publicly announced employment practice of such business or enterprise under which a preferential treatment is given to any individual because he is an Indian living on or near a reservation. 7 exemption excludes from liability hiring preference policies based on tribal affiliation.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="333"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/dec95/94-8097.html">CROW TRIBE OF INDIANS V. TEN BEAR<BR></A><BR>
Was cited by Chuck Repsis. Ten Bear was prosecuted and convicted of illegally killing an elk in violation of Wyo. Approximately 38.5 million acres of land in the present day states of Montana and Wyoming were identified as Crow territory. This territory included what is now the Big Horn National Forest. Was modified by the Treaty with the Crows. They will make said reservation their permanent home. They will make no permanent settlement elsewhere. They shall have the right to hunt on the unoccupied lands of the United States so long as game may be found thereon. The complaint was subsequently amended to include an additional count seeking the removal of a six mile long
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="333"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/02/98-2040.htm">98-2040 -- U.S. V. PRENTISS -- 02/24/2000<BR></A><BR>
(2) the indictment was insufficient because it failed to allege his Indian or non Indian status and the Indian or non Indian status of the victim. (3) there was insufficient evidence in this case to support his conviction because the government failed to prove the Indian or non Indian status of the defendant or victim. Prentiss's indictment was insufficient because it failed to allege the Indian or non Indian status of the defendant and victim. Because the conviction was based upon an indictment which failed to allege an essential element. Prentiss was home caring for his three young children and the two children of a family friend. The fire was extinguished. <p> Immediately upon extinguishing the fire. The outlet showed no sign of the sparking and arcing that one would have expected had the electrical socket itself failed. <u>See</u> <u>id.</u> at 274 75. <p> After the fire was extinguished. Prentiss told fire investigators that he was watching a boxing match on HBO immediately before the fire. <u>See</u> Rec. vol.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="332"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/mar96/95-4016.wpd.html">UNITED STATES V. CUCH<BR></A><BR>
The movants in these consolidated cases were both convicted in federal district court of federal crimes committed on land in eastern Utah that we had determined to be part of the Ute Indian Tribe's Uintah Reservation. The United States Supreme Court declared that the lands in question were not part of the Uintah Reservation. The issue is whether the Hagen decision both can and should be applied prospectively only with respect to convictions on collateral review. Utah).(1) The course of the litigation is as follows: In 1976. Challenges to federal jurisdiction during that time were dismissed or decided on the authority of Ute Indian Tribe. State v. (1) The details of the tribe's claims are extensively covered in the various opinions addressing the matter and need not be repeated here. Was collaterally estopped from relitigating the Reservation boundaries. The movants in the instant cases are Indians sentenced to federal prison for crimes committed in violation of federal law during the time the Ute Indian Tribe decisions were in effect.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="332"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/july2001/00-12280.man.html">TAYLOR V. ALABAMA INTERTRIBAL COUNCIL TITLE IV J.T.P.A. (7/9/2001, NO. 00-12280)<BR></A><BR>
</EM> the district court ruled that Taylor's § 1981 claim was time barred under Alabama's two year statute of limitations for personal injury actions. </SPAN><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="332"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/4CF0C80C879FF1E388256E6E0059CE0C/$file/0217047.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is amended as follows: 4288 KRYSTAL ENERGY CO. v. Assuming
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="332"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//july2001/00-12280.man.html">TAYLOR V. ALABAMA INTERTRIBAL COUNCIL TITLE IV J.T.P.A. (7/9/2001, NO. 00-12280)<BR></A><BR>
</EM> the district court ruled that Taylor's § 1981 claim was time barred under Alabama's two year statute of limitations for personal injury actions. </SPAN><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="332"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-8026.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The court further held that casino style gaming and slot machine wagering were against Wyoming public policy and thus not subject to negotiation. I The Northern Arapaho Tribe is a federally recognized Indian tribe with a reservation in the State of Wyoming. The state took the position that because Wyoming has a broad criminal prohibition against gambling and exceptions to that prohibition are narrowly drawn. The compact negotiations with the Tribe were thus limited to raffles. Claiming that Wyoming was required to negotiate regarding all games listed in the Tribe's proposed compact because state law permitted a nearly unlimited variety of gaming. That the state was not required to negotiate regarding
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="332"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ea50059bc5df2783882569520074e699/ce380b602b8395a488256e5a00707d32/$FILE/0010396.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
He argues 15230 that a new trial is required because the petit jury pool did not include jurors drawn from Indian tribal voting lists in violation of the Sixth Amendment and the Jury Selection and Service Act of 1968.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="332"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/CE380B602B8395A488256E5A00707D32/$file/0010396.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
He argues 15230 that a new trial is required because the petit jury pool did not include jurors drawn from Indian tribal voting lists in violation of the Sixth Amendment and the Jury Selection and Service Act of 1968.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="332"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/72DBFC7006C0EADF88256AF500571EA0/$file/0010396.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
He argues 15230 that a new trial is required because the petit jury pool did not include jurors drawn from Indian tribal voting lists in violation of the Sixth Amendment and the Jury Selection and Service Act of 1968.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="332"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ea50059bc5df2783882569520074e699/72dbfc7006c0eadf88256af500571ea0/$FILE/0010396.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
He argues 15230 that a new trial is required because the petit jury pool did not include jurors drawn from Indian tribal voting lists in violation of the Sixth Amendment and the Jury Selection and Service Act of 1968.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="331"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-5131.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Arguing they were barred by tribal sovereign immunity. We have jurisdiction pursuant to <hr> 28 U.S.C. 1291. Defendants' counterclaims for common law contribution and indemnity are claims in recoupment. Background The issue on appeal is the propriety of an order denying a motion to dismiss Defendants' counterclaims. Lead and zinc ores were discovered in the area in the late 1800s and a period of extensive mining began. The Tar Creek Superfund Site was placed on the National Priorities List. Among the environmental hazards alleged to exist at the site are contaminated water runoff from chat piles and former floatation <hr> ponds. Arguing they were barred by tribal sovereign immunity. The district court determined Defendants' counterclaims are claims in recoupment under the test established in FDIC v. Defendants argue the Tribe's appeal is jurisdictionally barred for failure to file a timely notice of appeal. The Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure require a notice of appeal to be filed
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="331"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/07/06/063093P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Seeking to have a tribal judgment of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribal Court of Appeals declared null and void. The bank now argues that the tribal courts lacked jurisdiction over the Longs' discrimination claim and that it was denied due process by the tribal proceedings. I. The Long Company is a family farming and ranching business incorporated under the laws of South Dakota and located on the Cheyenne River Sioux Indian Reservation. Who are both enrolled members of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe (Tribe). Who was not a tribal member. The parties disagree about whether his shares were distributed to Ronnie Long. 2 but it is undisputed that the Longs have majority ownership of the company. In his will Kenneth purported to devise his interest in the company and his land on the reservation to his four children. Noting that it has filed a creditor's claim against the estate and asserting that Kenneth's interest in the company was never distributed by the probate court. The estate was still in probate at the time of the district court judgement. 22 1 The bank is a South Dakota corporation with its principal place of business outside the reservation.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="330"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-5055.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The matter is before the Court on the Federal Appellees' petition for panel rehearing.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="330"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/E7FA1A1FAF02FA0788256D3A007C9157/$file/0035070.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§ 1291. The landowners included five tribal members who held allotted lands.2 Three allotments were held in fee by the tribal members with a reversionary interest in the United States. Two were held in trust by the United States for tribal members' benefit. The United States was not a party in Funk. A bench trial was held on whether construction of the project was a public use. The state court held that the project was a public use and that the condemnations were appropriate and necessary for the project. Portions of the project are on the Skokomish Indian Reservation. Some transmission lines from Powerhouse No. 2 to Tacoma go across the five Skokomish allotments here at issue. 2 Communally held tribal land was allotted pursuant to a Congressional policy of assimilation that began in the 1880s and extended until 1928. Some portions of the Skokomish reservation were allotted under the Tribe's treaty (the Treaty of Point No Point). Other portions were allotted under the General Allotment Act of 1887.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="329"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/06/042066P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
For a different reason: a judgment in their favor is not likely to remedy the harms about which they complain. 25 U.S.C. § 464 (which provides that government approval is needed for transfers of certain kinds of Indian property). The crux of the complaint is that the trust money is not being used (and will not be used) for the purposes laid out in the Act. Rescind the waiver of the Tribe's sovereign immunity that is included in the bond agreement. It held that dismissal was appropriate because the plaintiffs had failed to join an indispensable party. The defendants have adopted the district court's argument on standing. Have not. The alleged current and prospective misuses of the trust money because the Tribe is not a defendant and none of the defendants controls the Tribe's challenged behaviors. A brief methodological note is appropriate before we give our reasons for concluding that the plaintiffs lack standing. We need not accept as true their legal conclusions even if they are
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="329"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/EDB288C254B386D6882572DF00003A7A/$file/0530590.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is secured to them. At issue in this appeal is whether the Government's basis for maintaining a CCTA prosecution against the Smiskins their alleged failure to comply with the State of Washington's requirement that individuals give notice to state officials prior to transporting unstamped cigarettes within the State violated the Right to Travel provision of the Yakama Treaty. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Background Defendants Kato and Harry Smiskin are members of the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="329"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/D059DB395A3C20FB88256F78000101ED/$file/0335398.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Appellants argue that the allocation runs afoul of the 1 Pacific whiting are members of the cod family. 17400 MIDWATER TRAWLERS v. Appellants argue (1) that the district court should have vacated the challenged regulation and remanded to the Fisheries Service. (2) that the sliding scale method of allocation is not based on the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="328"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/05-1104.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the brief were David P. With her on the brief were Thomas L. Of counsel were E. On its holding that plaintiff Colleen Renville DuMarce's (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="327"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/07/98-2040.htm">98-2040 -- U.S. V. PRENTISS -- 07/12/2001<BR></A><BR>
(2) whether the failure of an indictment to allege these elements deprives the court of subject matter jurisdiction or instead is subject to harmless error review. <p> A majority of this court agrees with the panel opinion's conclusion that the Indian and non Indian statuses of the victim and the defendant are elements of the crime of arson in Indian country under 18 U.S.C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="327"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/D6EAA045EAE1C0FA88256C390053D8DE/$file/0116672.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The district court denied the Governor's motion to dismiss on the ground that the compacting tribes were indispensable parties. Was an unlawful delegation of legislative power without sufficient standards for its exercise. A.R.S. § 5 601 did not authorize the Governor to negotiate compacts for most casino type games because such games were prohibited by state law. The district court accordingly enjoined the GovThe State of Arizona and certain other state or local officers were also named as defendants. Officers other than the Governor are considered to be nominal defendants. We vacate the district court's judgment and remand with instructions to dismiss the action because we conclude that the compacting tribes were indispensable parties with sovereign immunity from suit. Background Because the question whether a party is indispensable
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="326"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200610/05-5402a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With her on the brief were Samuel D. Crowell were on the brief for amici curiae National Indian Gaming Association. Circuit Judge: This is an appeal from an order of the district court. The issue is whether the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="326"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/B49D3074CE2937E488256E5A00707C3E/$file/0030193.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Will protect defendants from propensity evidence so inflammatory as to jeopardize their right to a fair trial. We therefore conclude that Rule 414 is constitutional. We emphasize that Rule 414 is not a blank check entitling the government to introduce whatever evidence it wishes. We conclude that the district judge in this case applied Rule 403 conscientiously and did not abuse his discretion in finding that LeMay's prior acts of child molestation were not so prejudicial as to outweigh their probative value. BACKGROUND Fred LeMay is a twenty four year old Native American and a member of the Fort Peck Indian tribe. LeMay made both children orally copulate with him while their parents were away and threatened to beat them up if they told anyone. LeMay was eventually arrested and charged with child molestation. When LeMay was just twelve years old. Who in the summer of 1989 were two years and eight months old. As in the 1997 incident for which LeMay was charged. Implied that this substance was semen. LeMay was found guilty of rape.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="326"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/833BB21E77B4E35D88256AA3005AD73C/$file/0030193.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Will protect defendants from propensity evidence so inflammatory as to jeopardize their right to a fair trial. We therefore conclude that Rule 414 is constitutional. We emphasize that Rule 414 is not a blank check entitling the government to introduce whatever evidence it wishes. We conclude that the district judge in this case applied Rule 403 conscientiously and did not abuse his discretion in finding that LeMay's prior acts of child molestation were not so prejudicial as to outweigh their probative value. BACKGROUND Fred LeMay is a twenty four year old Native American and a member of the Fort Peck Indian tribe. LeMay made both children orally copulate with him while their parents were away and threatened to beat them up if they told anyone. LeMay was eventually arrested and charged with child molestation. When LeMay was just twelve years old. Who in the summer of 1989 were two years and eight months old. As in the 1997 incident for which LeMay was charged. Implied that this substance was semen. LeMay was found guilty of rape.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="324"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/06/00-3140.htm">00-3140 -- UNITED TRIBE OF SHAWNEE INDIANS V. U.S. DEFENSE DEPT. SECRETARY -- 06/13/2001<BR></A><BR>
Concluding that UTSI's claims were barred by the doctrines of sovereign immunity. UTSI appeals and we affirm. <p> <center><strong>I</strong></center> <p> The facts underlying this litigation are set out in some detail in the district court opinion. UTSI is made up of thirty members. All of whom are related to its representative. It is based in Kansas on land owned by Mr. Which was patented to his ancestors under the Treaty with the Shawnee. UTSI claims it is a present day continuation as a tribal entity of the Shawnee Tribe that entered into the 1854 Treaty. <p> In 1994. Oyler abandoned these proceedings before the BIA had made a determination regarding whether UTSI was entitled to recognized status. <p> In 1998. Part of this facility occupies land that was previously included in an Indian reservation created by the 1854 Treaty with the Shawnee. UTSI is based within three miles of the Sunflower Plant. Or tribe of Indians which is recognized as eligible for services by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Within whose reservation such excess real property is located. <p> 40 U.S.C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="324"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/16CF51C5760989F08825711C007849EB/$file/0530149.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
BAD MARRIAGE 1903 FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Bad Marriage was indicted in March 2003 on a charge of aggravated sexual assault in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2241(a)(1) and 1153. He was charged in a superseding information with assault resulting in serious bodily injury. Bad Marriage was released from tribal jail to attend an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting. Holding that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="324"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/oct96/93-2315.wpd.html">CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE V. BROWNER<BR></A><BR>
Muys of Will & Muys. 101 Stat. 76 (codified at 33 U.S.C. 1251 1387). (2) The other two critical elements to tribal sovereignty are land and mineral rights. (3) See Amicus Curiae Br. of the New Mexico Municipal League in Support of Appellant City of Albuquerque. One measure is an
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="324"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/044593p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We find that any aboriginal rights held by the Delaware Nation to the land known as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="323"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19946400.MAN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: The issue presented by this case is whether Jefferson County. Hull and Stanley Marcus became members of the court after this case was argued and taken under submission. Clemon are United States District Judges for the Northern District of Alabama who maintain their principal offices in Birmingham. The motion was denied. The cases subsequently were consolidated. We have summarized the facts briefly here. Stating that any holding with respect to the Compensation Clause was unnecessary. We concluded that although the privilege tax is measured by the income of the taxed individual. The taxable event is the performance of federal judicial duties in Jefferson County. We held that the tax is unconstitutional as applied to the judges. This is the first time that the issue has been raised in this court. That removal of the case to federal court was therefore improper.3 As no other circumstances exist that would support federal court jurisdiction. Our first inquiry is to determine whether § 1442 applies.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="323"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/08/054010P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The redistricting plan (the Plan) created a 105 member state legislature that was split into thirty five districts. District 28 was an exception. It was divided into two single member districts: District 28A and 28B. There were only two Indian majority districts in the plan. At issue is whether the Plan violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act by packing District 27 with Native Americans at the expense of District 26. Much of this population is geographically compact.2 Under the Plan. Only three state house seats and one state senate seat are in Indian majority The Honorable Karen Schreier. Two state house seats and a state senate seat are in District 27 where Native Americans comprise eighty six percent of the voting age population. Certification was granted and the defendants were given thirty days after the state supreme court's decision to propose a remedy. Although the South Dakota Supreme Court decided the legislature did indeed have the continuing power and duty to redistrict when the past apportionment resulted in a Section 2 violation.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="323"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//mar98/94-6400.man.html">JEFFERSON COUNTY V. ACKER (3/27/1998, NO. 94-6400)<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judge:</P> <P> The issue presented by this case is whether Jefferson County. Clemon are United States District Judges for the Northern District of Alabama who maintain their principal offices in Birmingham. The motion was denied. The cases subsequently were consolidated.</P> <P> The district court granted summary judgment for the defendants. Stating that any holding with respect to the Compensation Clause was unnecessary. <EM>See Jefferson County v. We concluded that although the privilege tax is <EM>measured</EM> by the income of the taxed individual. The taxable <EM>event</EM> is the performance of federal judicial duties in Jefferson County. <EM>See id.</EM> at 1572. We held that the tax is unconstitutional as applied to the judges. <EM>See id.</EM> at 1573 76.</P> <P> Jefferson County then filed in the Supreme Court a petition for a writ of certiorari. This is the first time that the issue has been raised in this court. That removal of the case to federal court was therefore improper.<A HREF=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="323"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19946400.OP3.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Hull and Stanley Marcus became members of the court after this case was argued and taken under submission. Circuit Judge: The issue presented by this case is whether Jefferson County. We have summarized the facts briefly here. Clemon are United States District Judges for the Northern District of Alabama who maintain their principal offices in Birmingham. The motion was denied. The cases subsequently were consolidated. Stating that any holding with respect 2 to the Compensation Clause was unnecessary. We concluded that although the privilege tax is measured by the income of the taxed individual. The taxable event is the performance of federal judicial duties in Jefferson County. We held that the tax is unconstitutional as applied to the judges. This is the first time that the issue has 3 been raised in this court. That removal of the case to federal court was therefore improper.3 As no other circumstances exist that would support federal court jurisdiction. Our first inquiry is to determine whether § 1442 applies.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="323"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/mar98/94-6400.man.html">JEFFERSON COUNTY V. ACKER (3/27/1998, NO. 94-6400)<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judge:</P> <P> The issue presented by this case is whether Jefferson County. Clemon are United States District Judges for the Northern District of Alabama who maintain their principal offices in Birmingham. The motion was denied. The cases subsequently were consolidated.</P> <P> The district court granted summary judgment for the defendants. Stating that any holding with respect to the Compensation Clause was unnecessary. <EM>See Jefferson County v. We concluded that although the privilege tax is <EM>measured</EM> by the income of the taxed individual. The taxable <EM>event</EM> is the performance of federal judicial duties in Jefferson County. <EM>See id.</EM> at 1572. We held that the tax is unconstitutional as applied to the judges. <EM>See id.</EM> at 1573 76.</P> <P> Jefferson County then filed in the Supreme Court a petition for a writ of certiorari. This is the first time that the issue has been raised in this court. That removal of the case to federal court was therefore improper.<A HREF=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="322"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/new/release.pl?B1=Search+Month&month=11&date=01&year=99">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="317"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/BD7EC45CE5FFA89B88257065005746B3/$file/0371439.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We hold that the EPA did have the authority to consider jeopardy to listed species in making the transfer decision. The EPA's decision was arbitrary and capricious. The state transfer provisions of § 1342(b) have proven popular. Arizona was the forty fifth state to obtain pollution permitting authority from the EPA. If the Administrator determines that the state is not following those standards. Each agency must
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="316"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/07/01/061150P.pdf">N:\DOCS\E-DOS\1-29\06-1150 SOUTH DAKOTA V. US DEPT OF INTERIOR OPN 1.24.WPD<BR></A><BR>
One of the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="315"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9CD2C5A4AE1B6A0388256E5A00707B22/$file/0035121.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Norton is substituted for her predecessor. Veneman is substituted for her predecessor. OPINION PER CURIAM: Before this en banc court are the district court's opinion and judgment entered pursuant to our court's mandate in 5627 Alaska v. There was no justification for taking so unusual an action here. We ordinarily do this only when there is a direct conflict between two Ninth Circuit opinions and a panel would not be free to follow either. No such conflict was asserted. Have provided a clear statement of the issues raised. A panel opinion would likely have emphasized the points raised 5628 by Judge Rymer in her separate opinion: that the present appeal asks this court to resolve the precise question we had already decided in the same case. The issue before the panel then would have been whether the law of the case applied. Or whether this case falls into one of the exceptions to that doctrine and there is nothing presented by the parties that would lead me to believe that an exception would have been applicable.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="315"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/445A43C3060EFEA788256A45005D38DB/$file/0035121.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Norton is substituted for her predecessor. Veneman is substituted for her predecessor. OPINION PER CURIAM: Before this en banc court are the district court's opinion and judgment entered pursuant to our court's mandate in 5627 Alaska v. There was no justification for taking so unusual an action here. We ordinarily do this only when there is a direct conflict between two Ninth Circuit opinions and a panel would not be free to follow either. No such conflict was asserted. Have provided a clear statement of the issues raised. A panel opinion would likely have emphasized the points raised 5628 by Judge Rymer in her separate opinion: that the present appeal asks this court to resolve the precise question we had already decided in the same case. The issue before the panel then would have been whether the law of the case applied. Or whether this case falls into one of the exceptions to that doctrine and there is nothing presented by the parties that would lead me to believe that an exception would have been applicable.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="314"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/05-1494.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the brief was Charles A. With him on the brief were Matthew J. Duncan are members of the Tribe who previously served as elected members of the Business Committee. Kochamp is a member of the Tribe who initiated a petition to recall certain members of the Business Committee. Duncan were serving on the Business Committee. Jenkins's recall petition was rejected for failing to comply with the new requirements. Explaining that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="313"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/94opinions/94-5073a.html">SHOSHONE BANNOCK V. RENO JANET<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="313"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/01/961438P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Miguel Duran were tried by jury and were convicted of various crimes related to the beating of Gary Torrez. Candida was appeared to be injured. Who noticed that Candida's clothing was torn and her underwear was missing. Candida described Gary's appearance and told Phillip that she believed he was the son of Shorty Jordan. We will hereinafter refer to Phillip Stands. Phillip put a knife in his pants and announced that he was going Phillip. After discovering that Shorty Jordan was not at home. Phillip's mother later told an investigator that Waylon was talking about getting even with whoever attacked Candida. Who matched Candida's description and was a son of Shorty Jordan. When they discovered that Jordan was still not at They then returned to home. Asked Candida if She told Phillip While the car was parked behind the house. Miguel asked Torrez to get out of the car. she could identify Torrez as the man who assaulted her. that Torrez was the right man. Which is in Mellette County. Waylon asked Torrez if he could borrow his As Torrez was facing Waylon.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="312"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200701/06-5092a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the brief was David C. Finding that plaintiffs' claims were barred by the six year statute of limitations for non tort actions against the United States. We nonetheless remand the case for consideration of whether plaintiffs' claims have been saved by recently enacted legislation providing that the statute of limitations
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="312"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/870518214FB0104888256E35007B83BD/$file/0217047.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Whether Congress has abrogated the sovereign immunity of Indian tribes by statute is a question of statutory interpretation and is reviewed de novo. 890 (1986) (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="311"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/03/97-1442.htm">97-1442 -- U.S. V. BURCH -- 03/04/1999<BR></A><BR>
Which was construed as a motion to vacate. The government's evidence is insufficient to permit us to take judicial notice of where the offense was committed. We vacate the judgment and remand the case for further proceedings.<a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="311"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/07/03/062556P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Was employed by the District of South Dakota (DSD) as an Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA). I Higgins is an enrolled member of the Oglala Sioux Tribe. Higgins was the only Native American AUSA in the Rapid City office and was one of three Native American employees in the state. Her duties were split evenly between the CIRCLE Project3 and prosecuting criminal cases. Higgins reported this statement to Interim USA Michelle Higgins's position was always a two year term position. She was informed at the outset of her term it would expire in August 2001 and she would have to apply for a new position in order to continue working for the DSD. The Comprehensive Indian Resources for Community and Law Enforcement (CIRCLE) Project was a Department of Justice initiative designed to enhance tribal justice systems. 23 2 Tapken. Higgins claims Kohn asked
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="311"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/02opinions/02-1286.html">TOMMY G. THOMPSON V. CHEROKEE NATION<BR></A><BR>
Argued for appellant.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>With her on the brief was <u>Robert D. Argued for appellee.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>With him on the brief was <u>Melanie B. New Mexico for amicus curiae Ramah Navajo Chapter.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>Of counsel on the brief was <u>Carl Bryant Rogers</u>. The Secretary s obligation to pay was subject to the availability of appropriations. and the Secretary was not required to reduce funding for programs. Mso bidi font family:
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="311"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/5D844D6C35F22F7088256E5A00707A1E/$file/9916158.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I San Xavier Development Authority (the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="311"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/751B8B71DA2DB666882569E30061521B/$file/9916158.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I San Xavier Development Authority (the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="310"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/F1B93CCB9BE63B928825707A007E2DF8/$file/0317207.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Chief Judge: The plaintiffs appellants are siblings who brought this action against the United States claiming that they are entitled to recognition as members of the Table Mountain Rancheria. As their father is a recognized member of the tribe. The plaintiffs appellants are Kathy Lynette Lewis. Four siblings whose father was admitted to the Table Mountain Rancheria in 2000. The defendants appellees are officials of the Department of Interior. The key events giving rise to this dispute are those surrounding the recognition of the Table Mountain Rancheria's status in 1983. Regardless of whether the ancestor through whom eligibility is claimed is living or deceased.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="309"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/97opinions/97-5055.html">DEL-RIO DRILLING V. U.S.<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="309"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/08F504BE0941A7A188256C8500598FD6/$file/0235171.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Are before us again in appeal of the district court's rejection after bench trial of their vote dilution challenge to Montana's districting scheme under section 2 of the Voting Rights Act.1 The plaintiffs live on the Flathead and Blackfeet Indian Reservations. Which are located in the four county area including Flathead. Defendants Bob Brown and Judy Martz are officials of the State of Montana. Montana is divided into House Districts and Senate Districts. Each Senate District is composed of two House Districts. There are 100 House Districts and 50 Senate Districts. One representative is elected from each district. State Senators serve four year This case is before us for review for the second time. On which Montana's current districting plan was based. Montana will automatically redistrict under its laws in 2003. In concluding that Native Americans were proportionally represented as a result of the 1992 plan. The 2002 elections (the last elections to be conducted under the 1992 plan) were fast approaching.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="308"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-1155EB.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Because the central dispute is between the Tribe and\ the State. \ but that exemption is of no consequence here.</p>\ </span>' var WPFootnote3 = '<span class=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="308"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/BF7AED3870353A3E88256C8D00576B6C/$file/0135472.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
CV 01 00010 EJL *Ann Veneman is substituted for her predecessor. P. 43(c)(2). **Dale Bosworth is substituted for his predecessor. We have received amicus briefs from: Washington Legal Foundation and United States Senators Larry E. VENEMAN that the Roadless Rule was promulgated without proper process and that it is invalid. An appeal was taken in both cases by intervenors. We consolidated the appeals and have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). That plaintiffs have standing to challenge the Roadless Rule. The co plaintiffs joined with the Kootenai Tribe are: the BlueRibbon Coalition. There are now 58.5 million acres of inventoried roadless areas in the National Forest System. 2.8 million acres of roadless areas have been developed by the Forest Service. Against the Forest Service on This is perhaps reminiscent of George Orwell's
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="308"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=92-2106.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Inc. was on W. Inc. was on brief for appellant. brief for appellant. Jefferson Melish was on brief for appellee. was on brief for appellee.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="307"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/08/97-9564.htm">97-9564 -- OSAGE TRIBAL COUNCIL V. U.S. DEPT. OF LABOR -- 08/04/1999<BR></A><BR>
The Board's order rejected the Council's assertion that it was entitled to tribal immunity. White was entitled. We hold that the Board's denial of sovereign immunity is reviewable under the collateral order doctrine. We do not address the intervenor's arguments as the order is not yet final and thus not reviewable as to his claims. <p align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="306"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/02/06/013695P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Lara is an Indian. Lara was charged in federal court with misdemeanor assault of a federal officer. The Spirit Lake Nation is a separate sovereign and the successive federal prosecution is permissible. The Supreme Court concluded that Indian nations draw their authority to prosecute criminal offenses by tribal members from the Indian nation's retained sovereignty and that tribal courts do not have jurisdiction over nonIndians. 195 (1978) (tribes have no jurisdiction over nonIndians). Thus the amended ICRA clarifies that Indian nations have jurisdiction over criminal acts by Indians. Whether the Indians are tribal members or nonmembers. Because the courts are obligated to interpret the Constitution and declare what the law is. It is important to distinguish whether Duro was based on constitutional law or federal common law. If Duro is a constitutional opinion. If Duro is based on federal common law. Or addressed the substantive issue of whether Congress is delegating authority under the amended ICRA or is recognizing retained tribal authority.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="306"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-6283.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Indian tribe[s are] the primary beneficiar[ies] of . . . gaming operations.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="306"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/07/06/061150P.pdf">N:\DOCS\E-DOS\6-1\06-1150 SOUTH DAKOTA V. US DEPT OF INTERIOR OPN 5.23(D).WPD<BR></A><BR>
One of the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="306"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/06/001399P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The district court found that twenty two of the tribal accounts were subject to garnishment. The government also unsuccessfully sought to have the court hold members of the Tribal Council in contempt. The Tribe appeals the district court's A full account of the underlying facts of this protracted dispute can be found in this prior case. 2 1 findings that fifteen of the accounts are subject to garnishment. Is exempt. DISCUSSION The denial of a contempt order is reviewed for abuse of discretion. Interpretation of a statute is reviewed de novo. A district court's findings of fact are reviewed for clear error and its conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. The Tribe's Appeal Case No. 00 1542 The district court issued writs of garnishment against twenty three tribal accounts utilizing the Act.2 This legislation was enacted in 1990 to address the need for a uniform procedure to collect over five billion dollars worth of non tax related civil debts. The Act is divided into four principal provisions: subchapter A (§§ 3001 3015) contains definitions and general provisions.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="306"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/08/03-3218.htm">03-3218 -- PRAIRIE BAND POTAWATOMI NATION V. RICHARDS -- 08/11/2004<BR></A><BR>
Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation (the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="305"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/03/01/013040P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. Gaming World is a Delaware corporation that specializes in operating casinos. The Band is a federally recognized Indian tribe. The Band is governed by the White Earth Tribal Council which has conducted business as the White Earth Reservation Business Committee. A written contract was drafted which provided for a term of seven years and a division of the net profits of the casino. Sixty percent of the net profits were to go to the Band and forty percent to Gaming World. The casino was furnished through a $5. Casino management contracts involving Indian tribes are regulated under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 (IGRA). 25 U.S.C. §§ 2701 et seq. Although IGRA was passed in 1988. It was only in February 1993 that NIGC began to function. An unreviewed decision by an Area Director was not a final agency decision for purposes of exhaustion and judicial review. 43 C.F.R. §§ 4.21(c). Contracts approved under the Secretary's interim authority were to be effective only
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="305"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/06-5003.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the brief was L. With him on the brief was Matthew J. With him on the brief were Arthur Lazarus. Sitting by designation. dismissed the cause of action upon finding under Rule 19 of the United States Court of Federal Claims (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="304"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/DEDA3978C124A95F88256F6A0059074A/$file/0310516.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Anderson was convicted of theft. The district court had jurisdiction and we affirm.1 I Anderson was the chairperson in 1997 and 1998 of the Robinson Rancheria Band of Pomo Indians (the Tribe). A federally recognized tribe whose reservation is located outside of Nice. He was one of six members of the Robinson Rancheria Citizen's Council (the Council). The Tribe's governing body that was responsible for overseeing its business affairs. One of the Tribe's primary business ventures was the Robinson Rancheria Bingo and Casino (the Casino). The Casino is located on Robinson Rancheria. The scheme was implemented. Anderson was indicted for this scheme and others. That §§ 1163 and 371 are not enclave laws but instead are laws of nationwide applicability. Anderson was convicted on one count of conspiracy and one count of theft from an Indian tribal organization.2 He was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of twelve months and one day. Is at the heart of Anderson's appeal. It provides: He was also found guilty of mail and wire fraud.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="304"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/992177.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. The revised Agreement in Principle was subsequently amended by the South Carolina General Assembly and enacted as the Catawba Indian Claims Settlement Act (the Settlement Act).
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="304"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/04/01/023460P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We affirm the dismissal because standing is lacking. 1 The Honorable Patrick A. Lineal descendants of the signatories of the 1863 Treaty alleged to the Indian Claims Commission (Commission) that the United States was in default for not making the payments promised under the treaty. The Commission decided that the Pembina Indians could pursue their claims even though they were no longer organized as a band. This judgment was upheld by the Court of Claims.2 See Red Lake. It authorized the Secretary of the Interior to prepare a roll of all living lineal The judgment was amended in 1961 to include additional findings of facts. The Turtle Mountain and Little Shell Bands of Chippewa were treated as constituent parts of the Pembina Band in this litigation. To distribute funds in equal shares to those enrolled descendants who were not members of any of the three mentioned tribes. Noted that the Little Shell Band in the litigation was not the same as the Turtle Mountain Band. The Commission also explained that it had
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="304"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/FE83761A81573A44882571B6007C9565/$file/0535085.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The frigid region is far reaching and so is the range of wildlife that inhabits it. KEMPTHORNE mental plaintiffs have challenged the adequacy of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="304"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/F3A817DDA98587C8882572B80054FFF4/$file/0635011.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
1 found that proposed FCRPS operations for 2004 The agency is now NOAA Fisheries. STATE OF IDAHO through 2014 would not jeopardize the thirteen area salmonid species that are listed as threatened or endangered. NMFS and the State of Idaho (collectively
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="303"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/B5BCBF70AFF9A7E688256D95005CA9A5/$file/0171736.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We have jurisdiction over Petitioners' timely filed petitions under 16 U.S.C. § 839f(e). BPA is the marketing authority for almost all federally generated electric power in the Pacific Northwest. 16 U.S.C. § 838f. BPA's actions may be set aside if they are arbitrary. Agency action is arbitrary and capricious if the agency has relied on factors which Congress has not intended it to consider. Or is so implausible that it could not be ascribed to a difference in view or the product of agency expertise. BPA's interpretation will be upheld if it is a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="303"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/63D8861732C1461F88256E5A00707D4E/$file/0035073.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is amended by adding a new footnote 3 at the end of Part II.C. Is misplaced. Sanders is a domestic relations case. Second Sander's holding that tribal courts had jurisdiction over dissolution proceedings of that marriage was based on the fact that the family unit (the couple and their children) resided on the reservation and that all three children were members of the tribe. Former footnote 3 is renumbered as footnote 4. The petition for panel rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are denied. 15802 OPINION TASHIMA. Are social acquaintances. Although it is on the Crow Reservation. Is considered to be
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="303"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/EE2DAC11437FC59088256B0A004D65FB/$file/0035073.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is amended by adding a new footnote 3 at the end of Part II.C. Is misplaced. Sanders is a domestic relations case. Second Sander's holding that tribal courts had jurisdiction over dissolution proceedings of that marriage was based on the fact that the family unit (the couple and their children) resided on the reservation and that all three children were members of the tribe. Former footnote 3 is renumbered as footnote 4. The petition for panel rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are denied. 15802 OPINION TASHIMA. Are social acquaintances. Although it is on the Crow Reservation. Is considered to be
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="302"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200006/99-1273a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs was Joseph E. With her on the brief were John H. The Project was harmful to the fish. FERC does not dispute that the study will cost Centralia up to $300. FERC has no meaningful hard evidence to prove that the hydroelectric project is harmful to fish. The petition for review is granted. Filed a complaint claiming that the Yelm Project was harming the fishery. Was required to file for a license. Not long after the settlement was signed. The Tribe submit ted a letter to Centralia stating that it did not believe that a tailrace barrier was either necessary or desirable.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="301"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/2B0D789626D52E6288256F32007C4BAD/$file/0216585.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service have violated numerous environmental and conservation oriented statutes. Background Fort Baker (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="301"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/E5459BCD33E1E3F588257054004A8748/$file/0435868.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
NRDC further challenges the 1 Intervenors Appellees State of Alaska and Alaska Forest Association (collectively
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="300"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/B772A5F8D804E42F88256CEC0019C5BC/$file/0135681.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The rail line is built on a right of way granted by Congress in 1887 to BN's predecessor in interest. We are asked to decide if the Tribes may continue to impose on BN an ad valorem tax levied on the value of
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="300"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/198032CD5FE7C7D188256ABF004DA98F/$file/0035073.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Are social acquaintances. Although it is on the Crow Reservation. Is considered to be
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-3.gif" ALT="300"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/672A1816803F072D88256E5A00707CAB/$file/0035073.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Are social acquaintances. Although it is on the Crow Reservation. Is considered to be
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-2223.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
After the Santa Ana Pueblo Tribal Court ruled that the Pueblo and the named tribal officials were entitled to sovereign immunity. The district court ruled that the tribal court's decision was entitled to preclusive effect and dismissed the Burrells' case. We hold that the district should not have given preclusive effect or otherwise recognized the tribal court's ruling. They were (1) The following facts are taken from the Burrells' complaint. The Pueblo's consent to the lease was necessary. Was required to contact the United States Department of Interior to initiate such proceedings. <hr> informed that if they conducted a successful farming operation. Were
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="299"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/12/99-7110.htm">99-7110 -- DRY V. U.S. -- 12/19/2000<BR></A><BR>
Rosie Burlison are members of the Choctaw Nation (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="298"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/12/99-6054.htm">99-6054 -- DUKE V. ABSENTEE SHAWNEE TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA HOUSING AUTHORITY -- 12/20/1999<BR></A><BR>
The district court held that ASHA was an Indian tribe and was therefore excluded from Title VII's definition of an
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="297"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/01/01-1261.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Of which she was the executive director. Arising out of activities No. 01 1261 3 that she was alleged to have committed as Discovery's director. Process or judgment that is necessary or appropriate to carry out the provisions of the [Bankruptcy Code].
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="296"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/147C63E97CE0D7EB882571F700761095/$file/0515332.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: Mark Allen is a former employee of the Gold Country Casino. Which is owned and operated by the Tyme Maidu Tribe of the Berry Creek Rancheria in California. I. Facts Allen was employed by Gold Country Casino as a surveillance supervisor. Gold Country Casino is a tribal entity formed by a compact between the federally recognized Tyme Maidu Tribe and the State of California. The Casino is wholly owned and operated by the Tribe. Allen contends he was discharged in retaliation for reporting rats in the Casino's restaurant and for applying to
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="293"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/07/08/063562P.pdf">P:\DOCS\E-DOS\8-1\06-3562 AUTO-OWNERS INS. V. TATE TOPA TRIBAL ED. BD. OPN.WPD<BR></A><BR>
Contending that the action was barred by sovereign immunity. A Tate Topa Elementary School student was sexually assaulted by a student at the Fort Totten Public High School. Asserting that Tate Topa was immune from suit absent an express and unequivocal waiver of sovereign immunity. Auto Owners's revised complaint alleged federal question jurisdiction and sought a declaration that the tribal court was without jurisdiction to hear the Lohnes action. As federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction over claims implicating the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). The district court also found that the tribal exhaustion doctrine was inapplicable because. Holding that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="293"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0110p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I Chippewa is a corporation chartered under the laws of the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community (a federally recognized tribe) and located on an Indian reservation in Michigan. When the Michigan State Police stopped a truck containing tobacco products that were being shipped to Chippewa by UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT X No. 03 1445 > . The truck's driver was Andrew Arch. Which is a violation of TPTA. The TPTA statutory scheme requires police to give notice to
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="292"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/F281E7BD9F53A0FD88256C6B0060029B/$file/0135219.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
765 (1985) (states are permitted to tax Indians
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="290"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0300p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
No. 03 1267 declaration that the agreements are void and a permanent injunction to prevent KAR from attempting to enforce the arbitration clause contained in one of the agreements. The district court concluded that the agreements were void under federal law and accordingly granted summary judgment in favor of the Tribe. Factual background The Tribe is a federally recognized Indian tribe located in the Western District of Michigan. The Tribe and KAR entered into both a Management Agreement and a Development Agreement relating to a proposed gaming facility that was to be located on tribal lands in Michigan. KAR was obligated to make monthly advances to the Tribe and agreed to loan it as much as $100. Another relevant provision of the Agreement states that [t]his is intended to be a legally enforceable agreement. Be enforceable between the parties regardless of whether or not this Agreement or the Management Agreement is approved by the Chairperson of the NIGC. Is void under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 (IGRA).
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="287"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/11/02-2347.htm">02-2347 -- GALLEGOS V. JICARILLA APACHE NATION -- 11/28/2003<BR></A><BR>
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> Plaintiff Appellant Phillip Gallegos brought a three count Complaint alleging violations of the Indian Civil Rights Act. After he was terminated from employment as a Jicarilla Apache Nation police officer. Are as follows. Who is not a member of the Jicarilla Apache Nation (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="287"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/0C89280F6649BCFC88256C380004EC38/$file/0036031.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We have jurisdiction over GOBIN v. The Tribes's reservation is located entirely within the County and comprises approximately 1.6% of the County's land area. The other half of the reservation is owned in fee simple by tribal members and nonmembers alike. Was reviewed and approved by the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Solicitor's Office in the Department of the Interior. 14332 GOBIN v. Gobin's proposed subdivision would connect to septic systems because sewer service is not available on that part of the reservation. Which is maintained by the County. The County indicated only that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="286"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/04/03-8012.htm">03-8012 -- KENNARD V. COMSTOCK RESOURCES INC. -- 04/05/2004<BR></A><BR>
The Indian leases are subject to regulation by the Secretary of the Interior who acts as a fiduciary for the Tribe. The MMS is responsible for (1) collecting royalties. Wright speculated that Comstock was underpaying him and others in the area. Relator Kennard researched and investigated public records and discovered that the Indian leases might have expired. They concluded that Comstock was underpaying royalties to the Tribe and also that Comstock knew that it was underpaying the Tribe. Relators sent the required
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="286"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-3431.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Because the district court acted properly when enjoining the state from enforcing its law on what is most likely Indian land. Joe Reardon is substituted for Carol Marinovich as Mayor of Kansas City. Provided the Wyandotte with no notice that they were going to be enjoined and because it relied on a misreading of a previous order of this court. The injunction against the Wyandotte is VACATED. The United States have been locked in litigation in multiple fora over the fate of the Shriner Tract. It is necessary to review this epic tale of claims and counter claims. Two of which are still pending. Kan. 2005) (challenging Secretary's determination that only statutory funds were used to take Tract into trust). 000 Ä was to be used
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="286"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200012/99-1440a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were Lloyd Benton Miller. With her on the brief were Leonard R. The Board properly rejected the employer's claim to be exempt pursuant to s 2(2) of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) on the ground that it is an Indian tribe acting in a governmental capacity. To consider the employer's argument that it is entitled to exemption under s 2(2) because the Indian Self Determination Act (ISDA) authorizes it to act as an arm of. Yukon is controlled by a board of directors elected by the tribal councils of the 58 tribes in the region. Yukon argued that it qualified for exemption under s 2(2) both as a political subdivision (because it is an Indian tribe acting in a governmental capacity) and as an arm of the United States (because it operates a federal hospital pursuant to the ISDA). Analysis Yukon advances two arguments for the proposition that its hospital is not subject to the NLRA. Yukon argues that it qualifies under s 2(2) as a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="285"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/apr96/95-2033.wpd.html">TEXACO, INC. V. HALE<BR></A><BR>
Counsel for the defendants appellees name is incorrectly listed as Lisa M. Holding
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="285"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/10/99-5064.htm">99-5064 -- U.S. V. 162 MEGAMANIA GAMBLING DEVICES -- 10/31/2000<BR></A><BR>
Oklahoma which are used to support the play of MegaMania gambling devices in Indian Country Multimedia Games. The government asserted the machines operating the game
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="284"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/1979B878EC64D5D6882572FF0081262A/$file/0417482.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
*** District Judge. *Clay Gregory is substituted for his predecessor. P. 43(c)(2). **Troy Burdick is substituted for his predecessor. Circuit Judge: This case is controlled by the proposition that an Indian tribe has the power to decide who is a member of the tribe. Facts Plaintiffs claim that they are descended from people who were named as members of the Mooretown Rancheria Indian tribe in either a 1915 census or a 1935 tribal voter list.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="284"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAyLTYxODVfb3BuKElzbGFuZHMgY2xhaW0pLnBkZg==/02-6185_opn(Islands%20claim).pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
See 25 U.S.C. § 177 (2001).3 It is undisputed that 1 The Senecas are joined by Plaintiff Intervenor Appellant the Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians. Both entities are recognized as successors in interest to the historic Seneca Nation. The Senecas also allege that an easement they granted in 1954 to the State of New York through the Cattaraugus Reservation was void under the Non Intercourse Act. We dispose of that claim in a separate opinion. 3 The Non Intercourse Act was first passed by Congress in 1790. Was subsequently amended several times. Which is at issue in this litigation. What is disputed is whether New York already had title to the Islands when it ostensibly purchased them from the Senecas. The Non Intercourse Act was amended once more in 1834. Stands codified at 25 U.S.C. § 177. 4 Aboriginal title refers to the Indians' exclusive right to use and occupy lands they have inhabited
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="283"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/04-1029.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the brief were Peter D. Of counsel on the brief were Charles A. The Board held that the Department of Interior (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="283"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/032245.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Who are also members of the Tribe and who control the Tribe's Executive Committee. The essence of plaintiffs' complaint was that defendants had exerted improper control over the Tribe's assets and other affairs. The Catawba Indian Tribe was involved in land related lawsuits against the United States and the State of South Carolina. The Settlement Agreement was implemented through both federal and state legislation. The federal and state governments were to pay a total of $50 million in trust to the Tribe. It provided in the interim that if no Tribal court is created. Plaintiffs are fourteen individual members of the Tribe and of the Tribe's General Council. One of its responsibilities is to elect the officers of the Executive Committee. Defendants are five members of the Tribe who serve on the Executive Committee. A sixth member who is the Executive Director and Chief Financial Officer of the Tribe. The Executive Committee is charged with handling the day to day matters for the Tribe. Plaintiffs claim that defendants have exercised unauthorized control over the Tribe's affairs and have violated provisions of the Settlement Agreement and the Federal and State Acts.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="283"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/B5D9A425AFA4D466882572C2007D4B8E/$file/0616521.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Plaintiffs are Arizona residents. Challenging the validity of the Proposition on six asserted grounds: (1) that it is an unconstitutional poll tax. Time was of the essence to plaintiffs because the 2006 general election was imminent. Justice Stevens stressed that the case would benefit from the development of a full record regarding both the scope of voter disenfranchisement resulting from enforcement of the Proposition and the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="281"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/014463A.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Arthur Hilts (collectively the Defendants) were convicted of using interstate wires for the purpose of executing a scheme to defraud Canada and the Province of Ontario of excise duties and tax revenues relating to the importation and sale of liquor. No doubt this smuggling operation was spawned to supply a black market for liquor in Canada that had been created when. The store owners were not prosecuted for violations of United States Department of Treasury Regulations which required that they record and report bulk sales of alcohol. 1 4 UNITED STATES v. Border crossings were monitored electronically. Several vehicles that were registered to drivers involved in the scheme failed to stop for a second inspection when requested. ATF agents and Royal Canadian Mounted Police also conducted surveillance of David and Carl Pasquantino and their associates loading liquor in Maryland and unloading it in Canada after it was smuggled through Canadian customs. Marked bottles of liquor were recovered in Canada. The Defendants were indicted.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="281"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/10/963481P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Thunder Hawk alleges that the district court erred in exercising jurisdiction over this case because federal authorities have no jurisdiction over offenses committed by one Indian against another Indian pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1152 (1994). We hold that the district court's exercise of jurisdiction was proper and therefore affirm the court's judgment. Thunder Hawk was driving his two children. Thunder Hawk submitted to a breathalyzer test that showed that his blood alcohol content was .11%. Thunder Hawk is an Indian2 and was charged in Tribal Court with violating the Tribe's criminal code. Thunder Hawk was subject to increased penalties under federal law because his minor daughter was injured in the collision. United States District Court for the District of South Dakota. 1 2 Thunder Hawk is a member of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe. Because both Thunder Hawk and his daughter are Indians. The issue of whether federal subject matter jurisdiction exists is subject to de novo review. The exclusive jurisdiction over such offenses is or may be secured to the Indian tribes respectively. 18 U.S.C. § 1152 (emphasis added).
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="281"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1997/11/96-2192.htm">96-2192 -- JICARILLA APACHE TRIBE V. KELLY -- 11/10/1997<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judge. <p> <hr align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="278"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/06/99-3324.htm">99-3324 -- PRAIRIE BAND OF POTAWATOMI INDIANS V. PIERCE -- 06/25/2001<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judge. <p> <hr align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="278"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200608/05-1383a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
O:\Slip\WP\2005\05 1383 Village of BENSENVILLE 9 7 06.odl.wpd
OPINION/ORDER
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. I. BACKGROUND K.W.B. was born in February 1994 to Boozer and Mawe We Ta Lo Wilder Boozer (
OPINION/ORDER
ORDER Rio Tinto's petition for rehearing and for rehearing en banc is granted in part. Are hereby withdrawn. A superseding opinion and dissent will be filed concurrently with this order. Plaintiffs are current or former residents of Bougainville. Who allege that they or their family members were the victims of numerous violations of international law as a result of defendant mining corporation Rio Tinto. Which provides that
OPINION/ORDER
Plaintiffs are current or former residents of Bougainville. Who allege that they or their family members were the victims of numerous violations of international law as a result of defendant mining corporation Rio Tinto. Which provides that
OPINION/ORDER
The 80 acres are tribal lands. As is required for all exchanges of Indian trust land. Which was never formally transferred to the tribe. 1361 and 1362) and to add the United States as a party (based on its belief that it is an indispensable party). Finding that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the case did not raise a federal question and the other jurisdictional provisions were inapplicable. Both of which suits were dismissed for failure to exhaust tribal remedies. Longie's subsequently filed tribal court action was unsuccessful. As was his appeal to the Intertribal Court of Appeals. His argument is immaterial if the urged bases for subject matter jurisdiction in the amended complaint would nevertheless result in dismissal. We have held that amended complaints. Federal courts have consistently affirmed the principle that it is important to guard
OPINION/ORDER
We conclude that such a treaty is constitutional. Contending (1) that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to certify extradition because the Extradition Agreement between the United States and Hong Kong is not a proper
OPINION/ORDER
Who was signatory to the contracts. Did not have the necessary authority to enter the contracts. Thus the waiver of sovereign immunity contained in the contracts was not valid.(2) Shortly after filing its motion to dismiss the demand for arbitration. All of which were aimed at nullifying the contracts and thus preserving the Tribe's claims of sovereign immunity.(3) 49 filed a counterclaim seeking damages and a declaration that the arbitration panel had jurisdiction to hear the underlying breach of contract claim. 49 separately moved to stay the proceedings and compel arbitration. Finding instead that all but one of the contracts were valid and that the Tribe had waived its sovereign immunity. A party may appeal a
OPINION/ORDER
Seeking to have contracts between the Tribe and the defendants declared void and to recover money the Tribe paid to the defendants under the contracts. Disputes between the Tribe and Turn Key concerning the temporary contracts and the Management Agreement have also spawned two other lawsuits. The Tribe claimed that the temporary contracts were invalid under 25 U.S.C. §§ 2705(a)(4) and 2711 (1994) (requiring NIGC approval of management contracts relating to Indian gaming). Alleging that the temporary contracts were invalid because they had not been approved by the NIGC and seeking the return of all money paid to Turn Key under the temporary contracts.1 That suit was dismissed by the tribal court for lack of jurisdiction because a forum selection clause in the Management Agreement required the Tribe to bring litigation under the temporary contracts in the United States District Court for the District of South Dakota. This ruling is currently being appealed by the Tribe. 2 1 The instant action was filed on December 18.
OPINION/ORDER
Was fatally injured when a tree fell on him at a logging site on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation in Montana. Even if a cause of action were stated. We hold that Plaintiffs have stated a cause of action 2916 under Montana law and that the discretionary function exception does not apply. Came to the Lone Bear logging site to
OPINION/ORDER
Was fatally injured when a tree fell on him at a logging site on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation in Montana. Even if a cause of action were stated. We hold that Plaintiffs have stated a cause of action 2916 under Montana law and that the discretionary function exception does not apply. Came to the Lone Bear logging site to
Plaintiff HCI Distribution is a corporation organized under the laws of the Winnebago Tribe and wholly owned by another corporation that is wholly owned by the Tribe. Was informed it only needed the importer/exporter license. Which was duly issued.
The Sac &. The fuel was sold to the Kansas tribes on the reservation in Nebraska. Was then transported to the fuel depots on the Kansas tribes' reservations.
The State of Kansas imposes a fuel tax on the sale and delivery of motor vehicle fuel within the State. The Younger doctrine requires a federal court to abstain from hearing a case where three criteria are met. These criteria are: (1) state judicial proceedings are ongoing. Was met. The court determined that this issue was a matter of federal. 756 (1998) (finding that tribal immunity is matter of federal law). 54 F.3d 535 (9th Cir. 1995) (finding Younger abstention inappropriate where threshold issue was whether state had jurisdiction to prosecute Indians pursuant to state gaming laws).
OPINION/ORDER
Excess property is essentially personal property that has outlived its usefulness to a federal agency.2
OPINION/ORDER
Class III gaming may be conducted on Indian lands if it is: (1) authorized by the tribe seeking to conduct the gaming. ' as the phrase is interpreted in the [IGRA].
OPINION/ORDER
This court is without jurisdiction to consider this appeal. granting summary judgment and dismissing this action. Been a rather lucrative enterprise. of the gaming revenues members. 3 A portion are distributed. Realizing that this dispute turns on whether or not those so designated are legitimately eligible for membership. 33 2 1 officials4 alleging that some ineligible persons were improperly receiving payments. That other eligible persons were being denied payments to which they were entitled. Was treated as an appeal from an interlocutory order and was dismissed by an administrative panel of this The dismissal was later vacated and clarified by the administrative The panel's clarification affirmed its dismissal as to the tribal defendants but stated that the appeal of the denial of injunctive relief remained pending as to the federal defendants. The defendants will be separated into two groups: (1)
OPINION/ORDER
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1291 over the denial of a motion to dismiss based on sovereign immunity. Walton appeared and was represented by counsel. Walton appeared and was represented by counsel the Tribal Court granted the motion and dismissed the entire action as barred by sovereign immunity. It reasoned that although Indian tribes are generally entitled to sovereign immunity under the Supreme Court's decision in Santa Clara Pueblo v. Tribal immunity
OPINION/ORDER
BACKGROUND This is our third review of this case. The Tribe attempted to negotiate a compact with the State of Nebraska that would have permitted class III gaming on tribal lands. No agreement was reached. The Chairman of the National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC) issued a closure order against the Tribe because the Tribe was illegally participating in class III gaming activities. Holding that the Tribe had violated the IGRA by conducting class III gaming in contravention of Nebraska law and that injunctive relief was warranted. Other findings by the district court relating to garnishment were affirmed. The case was remanded. It eventually replaced them with what is commonly known as
With him on the briefs was Peter H. With him on the brief was William H. With him on the briefs were Frank W.
Hunger. Dunn was on the notice of joinder in brief for
appellant Joseph P. Rotenberg was on the brief for amicus curiae The
Regents of the University of Minnesota.
Before: Wald. Circuit Judge: The question presented in this
appeal is whether states are defendant persons under the
False Claims Act. We hold that they are
not.
I.
Ronald Long was the Coordinator of Investigations and
Audit for the Bureau of Proprietary School Supervision of the
New York State Department of Education. The Bureau's funding depended in substantial part on
tuition assessments and fines that SCS paid to the Bureau.
Long's theory was that since the Bureau received a share of
the federal funds that SCS fraudulently obtained from the
United States. Frey and
other state officials took actions to limit and subvert his
investigation.
Long was taken off the investigation and then fired in 1992.
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs was Peter H. With him on the brief was William H. With him on the briefs were Frank W. Dunn was on the notice of joinder in brief for appellant Joseph P. Rotenberg was on the brief for amicus curiae The Regents of the University of Minnesota. Circuit Judge: The question presented in this appeal is whether states are defendant persons under the False Claims Act. We hold that they are not. I. Ronald Long was the Coordinator of Investigations and Audit for the Bureau of Proprietary School Supervision of the New York State Department of Education. Long's theory was that since the Bureau received a share of the federal funds that SCS fraudulently obtained from the United States. Long was taken off the investigation and then fired in 1992. Was a sweetheart deal that was but another instance of the state's conspiracy with SCS to conceal and perpetuate SCS' fraud a conspiracy that he alleges continued until SCS filed for bankruptcy in 1995. New York ignored evidence of SCS' continuing fraud and falsely represented to the United States that SCS' fraud had ceased and that it was actively monitoring SCS.
OPINION/ORDER
The tribe appeals. 2 No. 02 2433 The oddness of the tribe's claims is made dramatically clear by the facts of the case. Forest County is a large (1014 square miles) but sparsely populated (barely 10. The population is unevenly distributed across the county. 57 percent of the 1620 census blocks into which the county is divided have no human inhabitants at all. The county is governed by a board of supervisors each of whose 21 members is elected from a single member district in nonpartisan elections held every two years. The rest of the county's population is white. Except for a very small number of blacks (only 118 on census day) almost all of whom (106) are residents of the Blackwell Job Corps Civilian Conservation Center. A majority of whom are black. Are transients. The average length of their stay is only 188 days. Only 57 percent are Wisconsinites. Very few either come from Forest County or plan to remain there when their stint at the center is up. The difference between the largest and the smallest (86) is 18 percent of 477.
OPINION/ORDER
The District Court held that their claims are barred by the six year statute of limitations in 28 U.S.C. § 2401(a) and dismissed their complaint for want of subject matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1). We hold that their claims are not time barred. Enacted a plan to distribute what was then a $6. It is important to have in mind the precise terms of the statute that provides for the distribution of this fund. therefore set out the statute in full at this point. Finality of determinations 3We The relevant provisions are §§ 201. These provisions are now They read codified as 25 U.S.C. §§ 1300d 3. Shall prepare rolls of their members who are lineal descendants of the Sisseton and Wahpeton Mississippi Sioux Tribe. Who were born on or prior to and are living on October 25. Who are entitled to enrollment on their respective membership rolls in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations of the tribe or group involved. The Secretary's determination on all applications for enrollment shall be final. (b) The Secretary of the Interior shall prepare a roll of the lineal descendants of the Sisseton and Wahpeton Mississippi Sioux Tribe who were born on or prior to and are living on October 25.
OPINION/ORDER
Margaret Penn is one eighth Turtle Mountain Chippewa Indian but is not enrolled in any Indian tribe. Thus her status is that of a non Indian. At all times relevant to this action Penn lived on land that was within the Standing Rock Sioux Indian Reservation but owned in fee by a non Indian rancher. Penn is a lawyer who was chief prosecutor on the reservation until she was fired by tribal officials in August 1996. Penn was appointed by and a supporter of Smith. No hearing was ever held. The BIA's Division of Law Enforcement Services is responsible for enforcing federal
OPINION/ORDER
Margaret Penn is one eighth Turtle Mountain Chippewa Indian but is not enrolled in any Indian tribe. Thus her status is that of a non Indian. At all times relevant to this action Penn lived on land that was within the Standing Rock Sioux Indian Reservation but owned in fee by a non Indian rancher. Penn is a lawyer who was chief prosecutor on the reservation until she was fired by tribal officials in August 1996. Penn was appointed by and a supporter of Smith. No hearing was ever held. The BIA's Division of Law Enforcement Services is responsible for enforcing federal
OPINION/ORDER
The sole question on this appeal is whether the Narragansett Indian Tribe has sovereign immunity from claims against it for abuse of process and slander of title. We have recently held that the Tribe does possess sovereign immunity. After a hearing on damages (at which the Tribe was represented by new counsel). Its default judgment is void. We add that we have not considered the relationship of sovereign immunity to Rule 11 sanctions.
OPINION/ORDER
We hold that Turn Key's entire complaint should not have been dismissed. At the center of this case is a Management Agreement executed by Turn Key and the Oglala Sioux Tribe on November 30. Turn Key was to develop. All costs of constructing and equipping the project were to be advanced by Turn Key. Turn Key insists that these overruns were discussed with Tribe officials. It was orally agreed that the parties would modify the Agreement after receiving NIGC approval. The Act permits tribes to enter into management contracts for the operation and 1 It is this ruling which forms the basis of the Tribe's cross appeal. 2 management of gaming facilities. Some requirements are codified in the Act itself. Others are set out in the accompanying regulations. A few of those requirements are relevant here. The contract must contain a
OPINION/ORDER
They went to Round Rock Lake to sell bottles of Budweiser beer and were joined by Johnny Orsinger. The two victims were dumped in the back of Sam's car. Which he was too drunk to drive and which was driven by Teddy. Who was still conscious out of the back and laid him on the ground. A little later Jimmy heard a shot and turned to see that Begay had been shot in the head and that Johnny was standing next to him with a gun in his hand. NAKAI 7677 Begay and Sam were now dead. Gregory was arrested and advised of his rights. Gregory was indicted together with his brother Jimmy. The trial was transferred from Prescott. The jury was drawn from Prescott. Both defendants were convicted. Gregory was sentenced to life imprisonment. NAKAI cross section of the Prescott community was 16.7 percent Native American. Only 6.1 percent of the jurors who reported for jury duty were Native American. Although our cases suggest that Hopi and Navajo are far from being a unitary ethnic block. We cannot accept Nakai's contention that Native Americans were systematically excluded from the jury pool.
OPINION/ORDER
He is suing his former employer for failure to accommodate his alleged disability. We conclude that the ADA's remedial scheme is not comprehensive and reverse. He is acting ultra vires and is no longer entitled to the State's immunity from suit. No money damages are available. The states and their agencies are immune to such suits under the Eleventh Amendment. Even though it was not part of the holding of the case. The Court indicated that individuals could sue state officials for injunctive relief under the ADA: Our holding here that Congress did not validly abrogate the States' sovereign immunity from suit by private individuals for money damages under Title I does not mean that persons with disabilities have no federal recourse against discrimination. The appellees contend that the above statement is mere dictum and this court should rule that suits under Ex parte Young are not available under the ADA. The Garrett footnote is not contrary to Supreme Court precedent. The Supreme Court recently explained that when the relief sought is prospective injunctive relief.
We conclude Neighbors' request for an injunction halting development on the property until the Secretary has complied with the National Environmental Policy Act is moot. The land was used for an Indian school. Other parcels of land were added to the Indian School property. Closed in 1981.
While the property was lying idle. Neighbors argued the Secretary should have conducted an environmental assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act because
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: Peskind's law holds: When there is uncertainty about where to file a security interest in order to perfect it. A deed of trust securing Indian trust land was recorded in the Office of the Auditor of Pierce County. The county in which the land is located. A commercial lease of the land was recorded in the BIA Title Plant in Portland. Peskind's law is named after E.J. Peskind was a student of Professor James J. When Professor White called on Peskind and asked him what steps a party should take to perfect its security interest when there is uncertainty about where to file. Priority is obtained by recording in the county in which the land is located. Occupied a parcel of tribal land that was held in trust by the United States government. The Certificate of Approval provides that it
The revised opinion is attached for your convenience. Ruling that the Secretary's decision is a non reviewable discretionary act and. McAlpine is an enrolled member of the Osage Tribe who purchased two parcels of land in Woodson and Neosho counties in southeastern Kansas in 1988. The case is therefore submitted without oral argument. appropriations act for the Indian Department. The Superintendent of the Osage Agency of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) which is within the Department of the Interior in Pawhuska. Did not apply to the two parcels of land because they were not part of the diminished reservation and that there was no justifiable reason to place the land in trust status and take it off the local tax rolls. Finding that the appropriate statutory authority for analyzing trust land acquisitions is 5 of the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA) of 1934. That the BIA's task was to apply its regulations promulgated under 465 in reaching its decision. The Interior Board of Indian Appeals (IBIA) to which the Secretary's authority is delegated.
Is a matter of law which we review de novo. Id. Directing the quiet title action to proceed in state court.
OPINION/ORDER
He was sentenced to 110 months imprisonment. Who was Iron Cloud's second cousin. Even though at seventeen she was a little younger than the rest. She was put in the back seat of a car where she slept awhile. The river is approximately three feet deep at this spot. He lost his grip and she was swept away downstream. The police and the community continued to search for her and held out hope that she was alive until her body was found in the river three days later. He contends that the upward departure for extreme conduct was improper because it was based on conduct which was within the heartland of a voluntary manslaughter offense and which had already been accounted for by the enhancements for vulnerable victim and restraint of the victim. The standard of review is abuse of discretion on an upward departure under § 5K2.8 and on the reasonableness of the sentence. Section 5K2.8 permits a court to depart upward from the sentencing range established by the applicable guidelines if
OPINION/ORDER
Peabody contends that the federal question in this case is the enforceability of commercial Indian mineral leases approved by the Secretary of the Department of the Interior (
OPINION/ORDER
His grounds for appeal are: (1) admission of irrelevant. United States District Court for the District of South Dakota. 1 Aquash's badly decomposed body was discovered in 1976. Looking Cloud and almost every other witness in the case were members of. Were actively involved in. The government's theory at trial was that Looking Cloud and other American Indian Movement members killed Aquash. Who was also a member. Because they suspected she was a federal informant. This case is one of several cases to involve mid 1970s events at Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. Who were in a violent political struggle with Native Americans who supported the Bureau of Indians Affairs. Was convicted of killing two FBI agents during his stay at the Reservation. 541 U.S. 1003 (2004). 2 2 When the rumor began to spread around the American Indian Movement that Aquash was an informant. Aquash was constantly guarded and her requests to be let free were refused. Aquash realized that she was about to be killed. Her body was either thrown or it tumbled to the bottom of that cliff.
Was indicted in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma on four counts of aggravated sexual abuse in violation of 18 U.S.C. 2241(a). The offenses were alleged to have occurred in a
OPINION/ORDER
Is amended as follows: Slip Opinion page 7727. Delete
OPINION/ORDER
Chief Judge: Appellants in these consolidated appeals are law enforcement officers of the Navajo Nation Division of Public Safety (
OPINION/ORDER
Is Pyramid Lake. The Project was intended to convert some of the country's most arid land into irrigated farmland. Which is the principal source of water for Pyramid Lake. The State Engineer relied on his earlier ruling that intrafarm transfers were exempt from forfeiture and abandonment under Nevada law. The majority of the transfer applicants involved in these three appeals (as appellees) were successful in obtaining a ruling from the State We consolidated the five different cases for oral argument: Appeal Nos. 01 15665. Isabelle Winder are the three groups of applicants who originally appealed the denial of their transfer applications. The appellants in these two appeals are also the Tribe and the United States. The appellees are successful transfer applicants. Claiming that some or all of the water rights that the applicants sought to transfer were ineligible for transfer because they had been abandoned. After the district court affirmed the State Engineer's rulings that are at issue in these appeals.
OPINION/ORDER
Jurisdiction was proper in the district court pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153 (offenses committed by Native American within Native American territory) and 3231 (federal criminal jurisdiction). The notice of appeal was timely filed pursuant to Fed. Who is Native American. Who also is Native American. Who both are members of the Omaha Tribe of Nebraska. While they were drinking. Lupino said that he was not afraid of him and that he was
Winters was subject to a maximum sentence of 191 months' imprisonment. The district court1 ruled that the United States Sentencing Guidelines were not mandatory and sentenced Winters to 240 months' imprisonment. Winters and his brothers were drinking alcohol and driving through Pine Ridge Village. Winters gave Boy the Colt .45 and told him that Winters was in trouble and needed to get out of town. Winters was arrested the following day. The seconddegree murder charge was replaced with a charge of voluntary manslaughter. The Guideline computation was being provided for use on an advisory basis. The PSI indicated that Winters was subject to a range of 41 to 51 months' imprisonment for 2 the manslaughter2 and a mandatory 120 months for the firearm charge. The Guidelines are not binding on the Court. They were taken into consideration. He would have been subject to a range of between 57 and 71 months' imprisonment for voluntary manslaughter. 3 2 II. It then imposed a sentence that was authorized by the jury's verdict a sentence lower than the sentence authorized by the Guidelines as written.
OPINION/ORDER
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This Order and Judgment is not binding precedent. We agree with counsel that there are no meritorious issues to be raised on appeal. Based on evidence that he was selling methamphetamine from his home. Some of which was packaged for distribution. Stating that his client's grounds for appeal that
OPINION/ORDER
We also conclude that the Ho Chunk Nation is not entitled to sanctions or double costs for Wisconsin's allegedly frivolous appeal that Wisconsin voluntarily moved to dismiss before the completion of briefing. Which is now known as the Ho Chunk Nation (
OPINION/ORDER
Tribal registrations and titles are required for all vehicles owned by Tribe members who reside on the reservation and for all tribal government vehicles. The tribal certificates of title are of banknote quality and resemble titles of other jurisdictions. Ann. 8 142.(2) Nonresidents (1) Section 17 10 1 of the PBMVC notes that
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the brief were Andrew C. With him on the brief was Stuart H. Two central questions have been raised on appeal: first. Whether plaintiffs have alleged facts that are legally sufficient to revoke Libya's immunity under the FSIA. That plaintiffs have failed to state a claim for hostage taking adequate to abrogate sovereign immunity and establish subject matter jurisdiction. We hold further that the allegations supporting plaintiffs' torture claim are not adequate to bring the case within the statutory exceptions to foreign sovereign immuntiy. The complaint in its present form is simply too conclusory to satisfy s 1605(a)(7). Plaintiffs have at least intimated that they can allege facts that might state a proper claim for torture under the FSIA. We will remand the case to allow plaintiffs to attempt to amend their complaint in an effort to satisfy the statute's rigorous definition of torture. We note that there is a question as to whether the complaint states a claim for relief upon which plaintiffs can recover.
Names of counsel appearing on the appellees' supplemental brief were omitted from the attorney designation list. A corrected version of that page of the opinion is attached for your convenience. Arguing that the Navajo Tribal Court is without jurisdiction to adjudicate nuclear tort claims against Kerr McGee. Who are members of the Navajo Tribe and residents of the reservation. Because there is no explicit mention of exclusive federal court jurisdiction over Price Anderson claims. It concluded that the proper practice was to stay the federal court proceedings until the tribal court had determined its jurisdiction. We are unaware of any appeal by Kerr McGee of the Navajo District Court order. DISCUSSION The scope of a tribal court's jurisdiction is a federal question over which federal district courts have jurisdiction. The district court's determination of the proper scope of the tribal exhaustion rule is reviewed de novo. A The tribal exhaustion rule was created in National Farmers. The Supreme Court concluded: [T]he existence and extent of a tribal court's jurisdiction will require a careful examination of tribal sovereignty.
OPINION/ORDER
I. The Sac and Fox Tribe of the Mississippi in Iowa (Tribe) is a federally recognized Indian tribe that operates the Meskwaki Casino·Bingo·Hotel (Casino). The Tribe's constitution provides that a tribal council is to govern the Tribe and an election board is to conduct and supervise tribal elections. Members of the Tribe who were dissatisfied with the conduct of the Walker Elected Council circulated petitions to seek a special election to recall the entire council. The Walker Elected Council did not claim to have conducted an investigation. Stated only that it was satisfied that the irregularities were sufficient to warrant not holding a recall election. At the time the petition was submitted. The Tribe did not have a tribal court. Asking the court to determine whether the Bear Appointed Council or the Walker Elected Council was authorized to govern the Tribe and control the Casino. Because the Walker Elected Council was the federally recognized governing body. A special election was held. An election board does not have the power to bring suit in federal court.
OPINION/ORDER
This is the second time this case has come before this court. Since they were not approved by the NIGC. The agreements were invalid and the United States was entitled to recovery of any fees paid by the Tribe for services rendered under the invalid contracts. The United States maintains that it should have been awarded the following additional sums: the interest payments Casino Magic collected as a result of its construction loan to the Tribe. The United States is not entitled to any payment. If there is no genuine issue as to any material fact. Summary judgment is appropriate. The Tribe secured a loan with BNC National Bank of Bismarck (the Bank) for $17.5 million that was to be paid in installments at the Tribe's request. The loan was set up such that twentysix lenders were each responsible for funding a percentage of the loan. We rely on the version of the statute that was in effect when the suit was filed. Id. at 978 79. 42 1 The Tribe's first draw on the loan was for $6 million. Casino Magic was required to contribute approximately $1.7 million.
OPINION/ORDER
I The Columbia River is the fourth largest river on the North American continent. The Snake River is the Columbia River's main tributary. Salmon runs have declined to a small percentage of their historic abundance. There are now thirteen species of Columbia. Willamette River salmon and steelhead that are protected by the Endangered Species Act.2 The district court found in this case that
OPINION/ORDER
I The Columbia River is the fourth largest river on the North American continent. The Snake River is the Columbia River's main tributary. Salmon runs have declined to a small percentage of their historic abundance. There are now thirteen species of Columbia. Willamette River salmon and steelhead that are protected by the Endangered Species Act.2 The district court found in this case that
OPINION/ORDER
The denial of a motion to intervene of right is immediately appealable as a final judgment. We have pendent appellate jurisdiction to review the order denying permissive intervention. Cir. 2000) (concluding court had appellate jurisdiction where question of permissive intervention was inextricably intertwined with question of intervention of right). 2 2 1 keeping in mind that Rule 24 should be liberally construed with all doubts resolved in favor of the proposed intervenor. Rule 24 provides that: [u]pon timely application anyone shall be permitted to intervene in an action . . . when the applicant claims an interest relating to the property or transaction which is the subject of the action and the applicant is so situated that the disposition of the action may as a practical matter impair or impede the applicant's ability to protect that interest. Unless the applicant's interest is adequately represented by existing parties. (3) the interest will not be adequately protected by the existing parties. The parties agree that the only issue in question is whether the existing parties can adequately protect the interests of the proposed intervenor.
OPINION/ORDER
Which have been decimated by the decades of reduced water flows. Were not met. We reverse the conclusion that the scope of the EIS and the range of alternatives considered therein was unreasonable. The Trinity River was long known for its abundant fishery1 resources. The Trinity River Division (
OPINION/ORDER
There are only small exceptions pertaining to child welfare\ matters. The exceptions are not pertinent here. That provision stated that the Micmac Act\ would only be effective if certain contingencies were met. One of\ these contingencies was a requirement that the Aroostook Band\ formally certify its agreement with the act within 60 days of the\ legislature\'s adjournment.
OPINION/ORDER
The parties to this dispute came together for the purpose of The constructing and operating a tribal casino on trust lands within the boundaries of the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation in North Dakota. modern era of tribal gaming in this country was ushered in with the 1988 passage of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Whereby Lien was to assist in the financing. The agreement was submitted to the Area Director of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). Said agency having interim authority under IGRA to The agreement was executed by Wilbur Wilkinson and John Rabbithead on behalf of the Tribes. Arikara collectively comprise the Three Affiliated Tribes and are federally recognized Indian tribes which exercise their sovereignty under a federally approved constitution adopted pursuant to the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934. At the time the agreement was executed Wilkinson and Rabbithead were the TBC's Chairman and Secretary. Which was granted overall regulatory authority for Indian gaming conducted pursuant to IGRA. 25 U.S.C. § 2704.
Ronald M. Were on the brief. Anne S. Kidney and Robert Wi
ygul were on the brief for intervenors Grand Canyon Trust. Grinspoon were on the brief
for intervenor Hualapai Indian Tribe.
John E. Cutler and Stacie Brown were
on the brief for intervenors Clark County Department of
Aviation. We do so not because we
necessarily believe the rule is ". Because many of petitioners' attacks
are not yet ripe in light of the phased nature of the FAA's
proposed solution to the problem of aircraft noise.
I
The rule now before the court has a tortuous and complex
history. We recount only so much
of that history as is necessary to aid in our discussion.
A
In June 1987.
OPINION/ORDER
Kidney and Robert Wiygul were on the briefs. Cole were on the briefs. Grinspoon was on the briefs. Putnam and Stacie Brown were on the briefs. Were on the brief. Kidney and Robert Wi ygul were on the brief for intervenors Grand Canyon Trust. Grinspoon were on the brief for intervenor Hualapai Indian Tribe. Cutler and Stacie Brown were on the brief for intervenors Clark County Department of Aviation. We do so not because we necessarily believe the rule is
OPINION/ORDER
Is governed by South Dakota law. We find that the evidence in the record is insufficient to support a finding for IGN on its claim. This agreement was not binding on the parties. Was asked by the Tribal Council to review the agreement. A review that ultimately led him to conclude that it was not in the best interests of the Tribe. Concerns that contributed to the calling of a public forum that was held on the date that the Tribal Council acted to rescind the agreement. There was. Only one contact between CMC and the Tribe that IGN thinks is relevant. There is a dispute as to the The Honorable John B. CMC contends that the meeting was merely an impromptu and unplanned encounter that arose in the course of a training expedition during which its employees were visiting various casinos. That the Gaming Board and the Gaming Commission were bodies whose function was to oversee the Watertown casino only. Maintains that the meeting was a formal presentation by CMC designed to steal away the new casino project. There is also some evidence in the record that Alan Johnson.
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
Plaintiff Edson Gardner appeals the dismissal of his lawsuit against various Ute tribal entities and representatives. That the Ute Tribe was wrongfully possessing and transferring the land. These pleadings were not filed. Plaintiff alleged that he was in the custody of the Ute tribal court based on the court's letters admonishing him against the unauthorized practice of law and forbidding him from practicing in the tribal court because he lacked a law license and was not a member of a federally recognized tribe. Plaintiff's February pleadings were also deemed filed at this time.
After reviewing plaintiff's pleadings. Plaintiff was directed to file an amended complaint clearly setting forth his claims and the facts underlying the claims. Because it was not presented to the district court. Crow v. As we are required to do. Bender v. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
OPINION/ORDER
NAA charged that Stravina was deceiving the public and harming manufacturers of authentic Native American goods by suggesting that its products too were authentic. Which forbids selling merchandise
OPINION/ORDER
The IGRA allows tribes to operate casinos on their reservations or on lands held in trust for their benefit by the Secretary of the Interior (
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: This appeal challenges an injunction limiting but not entirely prohibiting coal bed methane development while the Bureau of Land Management expands an environmental impact statement.1 Facts The Powder River Basin in Montana and Wyoming is the largest coal deposit in the United States and among the largest in the world. Farmers and ranchers generally have surface rights to the land involved in this case. The land is thought to cover vast amount of methane. This coal bed methane is a natural gas generated by coal deposits and trapped in coal seams by groundwater. Coal bed methane is extracted by pumping the groundwater out of the land and into rivers. As the water is removed. The hydraulic pressure on the gas is relieved. So the gas percolates and is piped to the surface. This opinion is written in ordinary English. The pollution of the rivers and streams into which the groundwater is pumped. So that ranchers' and farmers' (and expanding suburban developers') wells run dry unless they are drilled deeper.
OPINION/ORDER
The district court held that the Tribe was entitled to change the use of the water rights. Was not entitled to apply the transportation loss portion of the rights. The lake is the principal natural feature of the Pyramid Lake Reservation. Manner or purpose of use of the waters to which [the owner is] so entitled. These remaining portions were transportation losses which. Holding that the stay procedure was an inseparable part of the Nevada water code and was thus applicable to proceedings under the decree. Upholding his decision that the Tribe is entitled to transfer its water rights under Claim Nos. 1 and 2 from irrigation to in stream use in furtherance of its fishery in Pyramid Lake. All that remains is the appeal by the Tribe and the United States. The question at issue in this appeal will almost certainly arise again. The United States and the Tribe are
OPINION/ORDER
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. (1) This order and judgment is not binding precedent. CM/SE is a business enterprise wholly owned by the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma. Who is African American. She claims that she was terminated because of her race and sex and in retaliation for complaining of discrimination. The EEOC rejected Johnson's claim on the ground that CM/SE is an
OPINION/ORDER
Jurisdiction was proper in the district court based upon 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331. Jurisdiction on appeal is proper based upon 28 U.S.C. §1291. The notices of appeal and cross appeal were timely filed under Fed. I. Background The following facts are taken from the district court's memorandum opinion. The Omaha and Winnebago Indian Reservations are located in eastern Thurston County. The Village is a small community located in eastern Thurston County. Was 80% Native American.3 The individual plaintiffs. Are Native American citizens and voters in Thurston County. Are located in Thurston County. The County Board is composed of seven members elected from single member districts. Members are nominated in partisan primary elections and elected in general elections in even numbered years. 7) are elected in gubernatorial election years. 6) are elected in presidential election years. 43.92% are Native Americans and 55.67% are whites. 35.9% are Native Americans and 63.54% are whites. Which are the majority minority districts.
OPINION/ORDER
Secretary 25 U.S.C. § 476(c)(1). an election board consisting of one Bureau of Indian Affairs officer and two members of the tribal government is required to post a list of registered voters. The Secretary may order a new election if he or she decides that the objections are valid. The amendments voted upon will become effective only if two events occur: they must be
OPINION/ORDER
The petition was filed pursuant to a provision of the Indian Civil Rights Act that makes the writ of habeas corpus available in federal court to any person
OPINION/ORDER
The petition was filed pursuant to a provision of the Indian Civil Rights Act that makes the writ of habeas corpus available in federal court to any person
OPINION/ORDER
The petition was filed pursuant to a provision of the Indian Civil Rights Act that makes the writ of habeas corpus available in federal court to any person
OPINION/ORDER
The petition was filed pursuant to a provision of the Indian Civil Rights Act that makes the writ of habeas corpus available in federal court to any person
OPINION/ORDER
We hold that the District Court was correct in using the cost of completion of the permanent casino as the measure of damages for the breach of contract and awarding interest on the judgment. Turn Key was to manage the casino for five years in return for a share of the casino's profits after deducting the cost of building the casino. The contract was submitted to the National Indian Gaming Commission in late November of 1994 for approval. The Management Agreement was approved by the Commission a year later. The Tribe was liable only for the first $4. Turn Key realized that the project was going to cost $1. The Tribe announced that it was treating the contract as broken. Specifically that it was entitled to reimbursement of certain costs either under the Management Agreement or on an unjust enrichment theory. The Tribe was awarded $1. Turn Key was awarded $1. On the ground that those expenses were incurred under a separate contract. Is the measure of damages properly applied on the Tribe's counterclaim. It will be recalled that the counterclaim sought damages for Turn Key's breach of the Management Agreement.
Concluding that these defendants were protected by sovereign immunity. See E.F.W. v. The court further held that to the extent relief was sought against defendants Kennah and Lone Bear individually. Plaintiffs appeal and we affirm.
I
Background
The facts in this action are essentially undisputed. Plaintiffs are enrolled members of the Northern Arapaho Tribe who live on the Wind River Indian Reservation in Wyoming. Who was also a student at the high school. Was killed in an automobile accident. Fremont is a private mental health care facility that
OPINION/ORDER
Are organized under the laws of North Dakota. This possessory interest tax The Secretary of the Interior is authorized and empowered to grant a right of way. Or through any lands which have been allotted in severalty to any individual Indian under any law or treaty. Which have not been conveyed to the allottee with full power of alienation. Where such lines are not subject to State or Territorial taxation the company or owner of the line shall pay to the Secretary of the Interior. That incorporated cities and towns into or through which such telephone or telegraphic lines may be constructed shall have the power to regulate the manner of construction therein. Nothing herein contained shall be so construed as to deny the right of municipal taxation in such towns and cities. 3 is assessed on 100 percent of the actual value of the possessory interest as determined by the Tribal Tax Commission (Tax Commission). Such appeals are conditioned upon prepayment of the taxes assessed by the Tax Commission. The Cooperatives' property interests situated within the Reservation are subject to the possessory interest tax and to the Tax Code's remedies and appeal provisions.
Tsosie are members of the Navajo Tribe and the property at issue is located in Indian country.(1) The district court dismissed the action sua sponte under the tribal court exhaustion doctrine. The events shortly after the 1868 treaty are the genesis of the rights claimed by both Mr. That same year an application was approved for Allotment No. 868 in the name of Na tithl hi ya a/k/a Mr. A patent was not issued to him until 1964 and he has never occupied the land. Her mother was born on or near Allotment No. 868 and her mother's umbilical cord is buried there. Tsosie's parents were married and continued living on the land. The United States characterized Allotment No. 868 as (1) Indian country is defined as
The cases are therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
Plaintiff Appellant Patrick Dean Coando appeals adverse judgments by the district court in each of the three above captioned cases. We have consolidated each of Plaintiff's appeals and now dispose of them in this order and judgment.
OPINION/ORDER
Claiming the agreement was a management contract that required approval by the National Indian Gaming Council (NIGC). That the agreement was thus void. The arbitration panel concluded that it did not have jurisdiction over the matter and that the contract issues had to be resolved elsewhere. Alleging the agreement
The Nation's motion to dismiss this appeal for mootness is denied.
II. Indian gaming is divided into three classes: Class I games (social games solely for prizes of minimal value or traditional forms of Indian gaming). Class I games are not subject to regulation under IGRA. Id. at
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: At issue in these consolidated cross appeals is whether the United States Fish and Wildlife Service's provision of Incidental Take Statements pursuant to the Endangered Species Act was arbitrary and capricious under Section 706 of the Administrative Procedure Act. Each of the Incidental Take Statements was set aside. Where there either was no evidence that the endangered species existed on the land or no evidence that a take would occur if the permit were issued. We also find that it was arbitrary and capricious for the Fish and Wildlife Service to issue terms and conditions so vague as to preclude compliance therewith. Analyzes twenty species of plants and animals and concludes that the livestock grazing program was not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the species affected nor was likely to result in destruction or adverse modification of the designated or proposed critical habitat. The matter was adjudicated by way of cross motions for summary judgment. It then held that the Fish and Wildlife Service's issuance of an Incidental Take Statement for both the razorback sucker and the pygmy owl was arbitrary and capricious.
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: At issue in these consolidated cross appeals is whether the United States Fish and Wildlife Service's provision of Incidental Take Statements pursuant to the Endangered Species Act was arbitrary and capricious under Section 706 of the Administrative Procedure Act. Each of the Incidental Take Statements was set aside. Where there either was no evidence that the endangered species existed on the land or no evidence that a take would occur if the permit were issued. We also find that it was arbitrary and capricious for the Fish and Wildlife Service to issue terms and conditions so vague as to preclude compliance therewith. Analyzes twenty species of plants and animals and concludes that the livestock grazing program was not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the species affected nor was likely to result in destruction or adverse modification of the designated or proposed critical habitat. The matter was adjudicated by way of cross motions for summary judgment. It then held that the Fish and Wildlife Service's issuance of an Incidental Take Statement for both the razorback sucker and the pygmy owl was arbitrary and capricious.
OPINION/ORDER
Norton is substituted for her predecessor. Have disputed the rights to water from the Truckee and Carson Rivers.1 Through its enactment of Public Law 101 618. This action involves Title II of Public Law 101 618 the Truckee Carson Pyramid Lake Water Rights Settlement Act (
OPINION/ORDER
Norton is substituted for her predecessor. The petition for rehearing is denied and the petition for rehearing en banc is rejected. Is hereby AMENDED as follows: 1. The Truckee River.
OPINION/ORDER
Norton is substituted for her predecessor. Have disputed the rights to water from the Truckee and Carson Rivers.1 Through its enactment of Public Law 101 618. This action involves Title II of Public Law 101 618 the Truckee Carson Pyramid Lake Water Rights Settlement Act (
OPINION/ORDER
(2) the evidence was insufficient as a matter of law to support his conviction on the firearm count. (3) he was denied a fair trial on the firearm count because other counts were improperly joined. (4) he was improperly denied a two level sentencing reduction for his role in the offense. Jurisdiction was proper in the district court based upon 18 U.S.C. § 3231. Jurisdiction is proper in this court based upon 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742. The notice of appeal was timely filed under Fed. Provost and Myron Rainbow were indicted in federal district court on charges of first degree burglary (Count I). Provost moved to dismiss the burglary charges in Counts I and II of the indictment on the ground that the incidents in question did not take place within Indian country and therefore are not covered by 18 U.S.C. § 1153. Provost was apprehended later that evening by an investigator with the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The district court dismissed his Count I conviction on jurisdictional grounds because the burglary in question did not occur within
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: 1 1 Judge Edmondson announces the judgment for the Court in this 3 Three cases presenting the same or similar issues of Eleventh Amendment immunity were consolidated and are addressed in this appeal. The issues in this appeal are whether Congress abrogated States' Eleventh Amendment immunity case. We agree with the Northern District of Alabama that suits in by private parties for against ADEA States federal court 6 violations are prohibited by the Eleventh Amendment. The cases were appealed for us to decide whether Congress abrogated sovereign immunity when it enacted the relevant statutes. 3 Because this appeal presents only questions of law. This appeal is properly before this Court under the collateral order doctrine. The facts of each Plaintiff's claim will not be discussed. Discussion A district a court's order to denying dismiss or a granting motion complaint against a State based on the Eleventh Amendment's grant of sovereign immunity is reviewed by this court de novo. 2507 n.7 (1980) (Eleventh Amendment principles are not applicable to suits in state court.). 10 4 Congress pursuant to the Commerce Clause could.
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge:1 Three cases presenting the same or similar issues of Eleventh Amendment immunity were consolidated and are addressed in this appeal. The issues in this appeal are whether Congress abrogated States' Eleventh Amendment immunity for suits under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (
OPINION/ORDER
The Secretary is required to take certain land in trust for the Tribes or the tribal member to whom the land is sold pursuant to the Act of July 18. Upon request of the [Tribes] . . . the Secretary of the Interior is authorized to dispose of the following described tribal lands within the exterior boundaries of the [Flathead R]eservation by sale at not less than fair market value or by exchange: CONFED. The Secretary of the Interior is authorized to acquire Indian or nonIndian owned lands within the reservation boundaries for such tribes. Title to lands acquired pursuant to this authority shall be taken in the name of the United States in trust for the tribes or the tribal member to whom the land is sold. The Superintendent's decision is not part of the record on appeal. The Secretary will notify the state and local governments having regulatory jurisdiction over the land to be acquired. Unless the acquisition is mandated by legislation . . . . The Secretary will consider the following criteria in evaluating requests for the acquisition of land in trust status when . . . the acquisition is not mandated: 13668 CONFED.
At issue are V 1's facilities in Preston. V 1's vendors deliver propane to its storage facilities either by train or truck. Seeid. None of V 1's facilities or customers are served by pipeline. Seeid. at 99 100.
Most of V 1's customers. Are
OPINION/ORDER
Red Bird was charged by criminal complaint and arraigned on a rape charge in the Rosebud Sioux Tribal Court. He was represented in the arraignment proceedings by a Rosebud Sioux Public Defender. A licensed attorney in the state of South Dakota who is admitted to practice in the United States District Court for the District of South Dakota and the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. The tribe will pay for an attorney if a defendant is indigent. The crime of rape is subject to federal jurisdiction when it is perpetrated by an Indian in Indian Country. Assisted Weir in locating Red Bird so that Weir could interview Red Bird concerning the same rape allegation that was pending in tribal court.2 The district court found that both Weir and Her Many Horses knew about the tribal rape charge and Red Bird's legal representation. Weir and The district court found that
Was arrested and indicted for aggravated assault on an Indian reservation against two non Indians. On the grounds that the government failed to offer any evidence that Romero's alleged victims are not Indians. 1152 is an element of the crime. 1152 cases is an exception to the statute which must be raised and established by the defendant. Because there was no evidence presented on the Indian or non Indian status of the alleged victims. Were working on a vehicle in front of Sanders' home. The three men remained pinned behind the car for several minutes until Romero left.
Romero was subsequently arrested and indicted in federal court with two counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon under 18 U.S.C.
OPINION/ORDER
Sitting by designation.\ ' var WPFootnote2 = '
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > Miccosukee Tribe of Indians v. The district court noted that a nondiscretionary duty imposed on the Administrator is a prerequisite for federal jurisdiction under the CWA's citizen suit provision. The district court ruled that the Administrator did not have a nondiscretionary duty to treat the EFA as a change in Florida's water quality standards and propose its own regulations. Is almost entirely dependent upon the state's own assessment. 33 U.S.C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="229"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/04/031302P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Pemberton shot at the trio but it is undisputed the bullets fired from his weapon did not strike anyone. Melissa Lussier was uninjured in the shootout. Pemberton and Garrigan were charged in a seventeen count superceding indictment with assault with intent to commit murder. The indictment alleged Pemberton and Garrigan were non Indians under 18 U.S.C. § 1152. That Pemberton and Garrigan were Indians under 18 U.S.C. § 1153(a). Alleged Pemberton was an Indian under § 1153(a). The plea agreement Pemberton signed states he is an Indian and fired at Anderson. The agreement further states Pemberton was unaware of any facts justifying his actions or the actions of Garrigan. Pemberton testified he was not an enrolled member of any tribe but considered himself an Indian. Pemberton further testified his parents were both Indians and his mother was an enrolled tribal member. The Presentence Investigation Report (PSR) identified Pemberton as an Indian who was born on the Red Lake Reservation and lived there with his mother.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="229"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//feb97/95-5080.opa.html">MICCOSUKEE TRIBE OF INDIANS V. UNITED STATES<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Miccosukee Tribe of Indians v. The district court noted that a nondiscretionary duty imposed on the Administrator is a prerequisite for federal jurisdiction under the CWA's citizen suit provision. The district court ruled that the Administrator did not have a nondiscretionary duty to treat the EFA as a change in Florida's water quality standards and propose its own regulations. Is almost entirely dependent upon the state's own assessment. 33 U.S.C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="227"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/07/02/061438P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Yvette LaFloe Falcon was convicted by a jury of one count of conspiring to commit an offense against the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 and two counts of embezzlement or misapplication of funds from an Indian tribal organization in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1163. Background Falcon is an enrolled member of the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="227"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-4296.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Plaintiffs are individual members of the Ute Indian Tribe. They are appealing the district court's dismissal of their complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Because the record is inadequate to permit proper review. It sought leave and was permitted to intervene. At the core of plaintiffs' action is the allegation that various federal statutes (1) This order and judgment is not binding precedent. Jurrius and the Jurrius Group have mismanaged and misappropriated tribal assets by using asset funds to purchase a shopping center and hire an expensive law firm to pursue a risky lobbying scheme regarding water settlement funds. Plaintiffs contend all of these things are known. That defendants have failed to take appropriate action.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="227"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200011/98-5516a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were David W. Baldwin were on the brief for amici Pueblo of San Juan. With them on the joint brief were Lois J. We conclude that the Lucky Tab II is a Class II aid. The Act's purpose is to
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="225"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/02/01-3400.htm">01-3400 -- HARTMAN V. KICKAPOO TRIBE GAMING COMMISSION -- 02/11/2003<BR></A><BR>
Hartman was employed by the Kickapoo Tribe as a licensed card dealer at a gaming facility owned by the Tribe. Was immune from suit by virtue of its sovereignty. That appeal is currently pending. <p> Following the adverse ruling in the Tribal Court. Although Congress did provide that certain decisions by the NIGC made under various provisions of IGRA are subject to federal court review under the Administrative Procedures Act. It was required to refrain from exercising jurisdiction until the parties had exhausted their remedies in tribal court.<a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="224"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9985054379A9C5D188256BCE00827DF3/$file/0015688.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is hereby amended by adding new footnote 22 at the end of the first sentence. ALPINE LAND & RESERVOIR 8039 22 This holding applies only to the extent that the equitable intrafarm exemption was used to find that no abandonment or forfeiture had occurred as to the parcels at issue in the underlying transfer applications. Transfer applicant Rambling River is not affected by our remand order because its parcels were not covered by an intrafarm exemption. The district court affirmed the State Engineer's Ruling No. 4591 to the extent that it stated that there was no clear and convincing evidence of nonuse on any specific portion of Rambling River's parcels. Rambling River's parcels were not part of the district court's remand order and the State Engineer did not address Rambling River in his Supplemental Ruling on Remand No. 4750. In which the intrafarm exemption was applied to the other parcels in question. Which have not been challenged. Rambling River's transfer applications are not subject to further proceedings on remand.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="224"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ea50059bc5df2783882569520074e699/9985054379a9c5d188256bce00827df3/$FILE/0015688.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is hereby amended by adding new footnote 22 at the end of the first sentence. ALPINE LAND & RESERVOIR 8039 22 This holding applies only to the extent that the equitable intrafarm exemption was used to find that no abandonment or forfeiture had occurred as to the parcels at issue in the underlying transfer applications. Transfer applicant Rambling River is not affected by our remand order because its parcels were not covered by an intrafarm exemption. The district court affirmed the State Engineer's Ruling No. 4591 to the extent that it stated that there was no clear and convincing evidence of nonuse on any specific portion of Rambling River's parcels. Rambling River's parcels were not part of the district court's remand order and the State Engineer did not address Rambling River in his Supplemental Ruling on Remand No. 4750. In which the intrafarm exemption was applied to the other parcels in question. Which have not been challenged. Rambling River's transfer applications are not subject to further proceedings on remand.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="224"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/09/963448P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. The following facts are based on the evidence. With disputed questions of fact deemed to have been resolved by the jury in a manner that supports its verdict. Wilkinson was Chairman of the Three Affiliated Tribes (the Tribe) at all times relevant to the illegal activities charged in the indictment. The Tribe is located on the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation in North Dakota and qualifies as an Indian tribal organization under 18 U.S.C. § 1163 (1994). 000 disbursement was made under the condition that the Tribe comply with special reporting and supervision requirements imposed by the BIA. These conditions were placed on the receipt of these funds after the Tribe neglected to comply with standard reporting procedures after receiving the $68. A Commitment Order between the Tribe and the BIA outlining the applicable conditions was signed by Wilkinson on behalf of the Tribe. 000 check was received and endorsed by Wilkinson on behalf of the Tribe and deposited in a supervised account opened in the name
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="223"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/08/99-7108.htm">99-7108 -- HARRISON V. DEPT. OF INTERIOR BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS -- 08/28/2000<BR></A><BR>
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> Plaintiff Appellant Sheron L. Harrison submitted an application for a CDIB and for tribal membership to the Choctaw Nation on behalf of herself and of other relatives who are not involved in this appeal. Who was enrolled as a member of the Choctaw tribe on the Final Choctaw Rolls. <p> The Choctaw Nation. It stated that although Cyrus Kingsbury was enrolled as a member of the Choctaw tribe. Were listed on the rolls as freedmen. That the district court erred in affirming the BIA because she is entitled to a CDIB based on her descent from Cyrus H. A reviewing court should have the full administrative record before it. <u>See</u> <u>Citizens to Preserve Overton Park. That the BIA submitted what it claims was the entire administrative record to the district court. <u>See</u> R. doc. 78. Harrison fails to specify <em>which</em> specific documents allegedly relied upon by the BIA are missing from the record. We are unable to determine that the administrative record is incomplete.<a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="223"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/912A11E7427E87B188256B60006E9F02/$file/0015688.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Which is situated on the Tribe's aboriginal homeland. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Pyramid Lake's sole source of water is the Truckee River. The Project 2631 was designed to use the waters from both the Truckee and Carson Rivers to irrigate a substantial area in the vicinity of Fallon. Which by that time was under the management of the Truckee Carson Irrigation District (TCID).1 The status of Truckee River water rights ostensibly determined under the Orr Ditch Decree was not resolved. The Supreme Court held that the United States and the Tribe were precluded on res judicata grounds from relitigating the water rights determination embodied in the Orr Ditch Decree. The Project was operated by the Truckee Carson Irrigation District (TCID) under a delegation of authority from the United States. 2632 addition. Holding that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="223"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ea50059bc5df2783882569520074e699/912a11e7427e87b188256b60006e9f02/$FILE/0015688.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Which is situated on the Tribe's aboriginal homeland. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Pyramid Lake's sole source of water is the Truckee River. The Project 2631 was designed to use the waters from both the Truckee and Carson Rivers to irrigate a substantial area in the vicinity of Fallon. Which by that time was under the management of the Truckee Carson Irrigation District (TCID).1 The status of Truckee River water rights ostensibly determined under the Orr Ditch Decree was not resolved. The Supreme Court held that the United States and the Tribe were precluded on res judicata grounds from relitigating the water rights determination embodied in the Orr Ditch Decree. The Project was operated by the Truckee Carson Irrigation District (TCID) under a delegation of authority from the United States. 2632 addition. Holding that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="223"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/02E656A7D4B2E3FA8825725F00771BE3/$file/0536108.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The United States was liable for effecting an unconstitutional taking of Delay's cause of action when it abolished and de funded the Commission in 1981. So that the judgment against the Commission should be modified to be a judgment against the United States for which the United States Judgment Fund was liable. The Delay beneficiaries have appealed. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. I The Commission was established by Executive Order in 1967 by President Lyndon Johnson and charged with maintaining a joint plan for federal. The Delay children are beneficiaries of William Delay's estate (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="222"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Jan1998/98a1772p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Argued before the bankruptcy court that section 106(a) was not enacted pursuant to a valid exercise of congressional power. We will affirm the district court. Because they were incorrectly completed. This statute requires claims to be submitted to DPW within 180 days after the treatment is rendered. Demanding judgment against DPW
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="221"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200607/05-5269a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were Peter D. With him on the brief were Dennis M. The district court concluded that the federal government and its officers have been derelict in their duties.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="221"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-7040.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Covington filed a motion to dismiss on the grounds that he was a federal employee under the Federal Tort Claims Act (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="220"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/02/031781P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I Morin is an enrolled member of the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians (the Tribe). Morin resigned and was appointed Director of Tribal Services. Co defendant Raphael Decoteau is also an enrolled member of the Tribe. Decoteau was again elected to the Tribal Council and later served as Tribal Chairman in 1998. The Academies thereafter entered into a lease with Uniband to use the garage for storing documents at a monthly rate of $5000.1 Once the lease was in place. Both Morin and Testimony at trial indicated the only documents Uniband ever stored in the garage were blank social security forms. 2 1 Decoteau were signatories on the account and together issued checks in excess of $90. 728.13 were issued to cash. While additional checks totaling $7800 were made payable to Decoteau's relatives. Decoteau was defeated in his bid for re election as Tribal Chairman. Determined it was unconscionable. Morin and Decoteau were charged in a five count indictment. The Tribe or Uniband. 3 Morin was convicted on all five counts.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="220"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/05/051654P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Was amended to exclude all parts of the Cannabis plant that contain less than one percent of the chemical tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) by weight. A definition of industrial hemp was added to section 106.00. That are. Or have historically been. He also warned that anyone cultivating marijuana or hemp without one was subject to criminal prosecution. Told the government he was doing so. He was sent a DEA registration application. It was never completed. A registration was never issued. That crop was under contract to be sold to another hemp processing company. Which the court held was included in the definition of marijuana under the CSA. The court determined that the classification of hemp as marijuana was not irrational and unconstitutional. DISCUSSION Appellants argue the district court erred (1) by holding that industrial hemp is subject to the CSA. Industrial Hemp Is Subject to the CSA The CSA makes it illegal to manufacture. A controlled substance is anything listed in a schedule under the CSA. A drug or substance must have a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="218"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/july96/92-6331.wpd.html">PONCA TRIBE OF OKLA. V. STATE OF OKLA.<BR></A><BR>
This appeal is before us on remand from the United States Supreme Court. We have been required to consider whether the state waived its immunity by negotiating with the tribe.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="216"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/01/00-2136.htm">00-2136 -- JOSEPH A. V. INGRAM -- 01/07/2002<BR></A><BR>
<a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="216"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Dec1997/97a1755p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We have jurisdiction to review the judgment of the district court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY CSB is a New Jersey chartered. It has been selling CollegeSure(R) CDs which are deposit contracts designed to provide sufficient funds to cover future costs of college education. We deal only with the second action and thus our further references are to that case. Was unconstitutional. Because the abrogation was not a proper exercise of Congress' Fourteenth Amendment enforcement powers. It also pleaded a common law tort of unfair competition but we will not discuss that claim further as the district court dismissed it. Was an unconstitutional attempt to abrogate the states' Eleventh Amendment immunity. The district court found that the constructive waiver doctrine did not apply because Florida Prepaid was engaging in a core government function. CSB appealed from the dismissal of the Lanham Act claim to this court.2 We will affirm the district court's holding that the TRCA is an unconstitutional exercise of Congress' Fourteenth Amendment powers as applied to the present case.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="215"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/95opinions/95-5137.html">BLACK V. SHHS<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200308/02-5139b.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
ORDER It is ORDERED. The judgment of the district court is reversed. The case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion. McGrail Deputy Clerk Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Federal Reporter or U.S.App.D.C. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of any formal errors in order that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go to press. With her on the briefs were Bills of costs must be filed within 14 days after entry of judgment. With him on the brief was Cynthia Taub. I. Background A federally recognized American Indian tribe is entitled to significant privileges. It is ordinarily up to the Secretary of the Interior. To determine whether the United States will recognize the sovereignty of a putative tribe. Mashpee is a corporation that represents the interests of some 1. Perhaps because it was distracted by its efforts to gain recognition through litigation. The BAR notified Mashpee that it was placing the petition on its list of applications ``ready.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/02/06/013346P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Asserting that they are entitled to the benefit of the state's Eleventh Amendment immunity.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/19AB6327DF36903A88256B2E0063B8A3/$file/0030068.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The victim's nose was also broken. He also reported that Gallaher was armed with a .280 caliber rifle. He was instructed not to confront Gallaher until additional police units arrived to assist him. Officer Hand found 7 mm and .280 ammunition on the ground in the area where Gallaher was taken into custody. Gallaher was indicted for being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924. Gallaher was acquitted on the firearm possession count. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Gallaher's offense was level 24. Is 84 105 months. 17281 he points to the Colville Treaty's provision that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="214"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/5C55741CC578B9D888256E5A00707DA7/$file/0030068.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The victim's nose was also broken. He also reported that Gallaher was armed with a .280 caliber rifle. He was instructed not to confront Gallaher until additional police units arrived to assist him. Officer Hand found 7 mm and .280 ammunition on the ground in the area where Gallaher was taken into custody. Gallaher was indicted for being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924. Gallaher was acquitted on the firearm possession count. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Gallaher's offense was level 24. Is 84 105 months. 17281 he points to the Colville Treaty's provision that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="213"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=92-1165.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is amended as follows: On page 28. Were on brief. Were on brief. Was on brief. Were on brief. Were on brief. Will & Emery. (2) make findings regarding allegations of anticompetitive consequences of the merger that were unique to Holyoke. Northeast Utilities Service Company (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="212"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/60ED92E6D721F94188256E5A00707C76/$file/0015128.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is hereby amended as follows: Slip Op. at 9033. That is. Hence that Walker and In re Collins are 11440 no longer good law. The definition of
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="212"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9E259207B0F126FA88256E5A00707BEC/$file/0015128.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Ellett seeks declaratory and injunctive relief barring Goldberg from collecting certain pre petition state income tax obligations that were allegedly discharged in his bankruptcy proceeding. Ellett's Chapter 13 plan was confirmed in April 1995 and was completed two years later. The FTB notice stated that such obligations were not discharged in bankruptcy and that collection action was
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="212"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ea50059bc5df2783882569520074e699/cee298df6be46cf088256ab4006d9c29/$FILE/0015128.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is hereby amended as follows: Slip Op. at 9033. That is. Hence that Walker and In re Collins are 11440 no longer good law. The definition of
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="212"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ea50059bc5df2783882569520074e699/9e259207b0f126fa88256e5a00707bec/$FILE/0015128.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Ellett seeks declaratory and injunctive relief barring Goldberg from collecting certain pre petition state income tax obligations that were allegedly discharged in his bankruptcy proceeding. Ellett's Chapter 13 plan was confirmed in April 1995 and was completed two years later. The FTB notice stated that such obligations were not discharged in bankruptcy and that collection action was
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="212"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/04571662AAE1564488256A8B005A3339/$file/0015128.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Ellett seeks declaratory and injunctive relief barring Goldberg from collecting certain pre petition state income tax obligations that were allegedly discharged in his bankruptcy proceeding. Ellett's Chapter 13 plan was confirmed in April 1995 and was completed two years later. The FTB notice stated that such obligations were not discharged in bankruptcy and that collection action was
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="212"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ea50059bc5df2783882569520074e699/04571662aae1564488256a8b005a3339/$FILE/0015128.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Ellett seeks declaratory and injunctive relief barring Goldberg from collecting certain pre petition state income tax obligations that were allegedly discharged in his bankruptcy proceeding. Ellett's Chapter 13 plan was confirmed in April 1995 and was completed two years later. The FTB notice stated that such obligations were not discharged in bankruptcy and that collection action was
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="212"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/CEE298DF6BE46CF088256AB4006D9C29/$file/0015128.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is hereby amended as follows: Slip Op. at 9033. That is. Hence that Walker and In re Collins are 11440 no longer good law. The definition of
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="212"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ea50059bc5df2783882569520074e699/60ed92e6d721f94188256e5a00707c76/$FILE/0015128.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is hereby amended as follows: Slip Op. at 9033. That is. Hence that Walker and In re Collins are 11440 no longer good law. The definition of
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="212"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/03/02-2112.htm">02-2112 -- KENNEDY V. HUGHES -- 03/20/2003<BR></A><BR>
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="210"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/C03B4E1D956ADBBB88256FB70000FCD9/$file/0316654.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is hereby amended as follows: At slip. op. 16864. Change
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="209"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/06-1072.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Of counsel was John M. With her on the brief was Sue Ellen Wooldridge. Based on what they asserted was the Secretary of the Interior's unreasonable delay in distributing to them their share of the Mississippi Sioux Tribes Judgment Fund (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="209"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/03/042595P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Who is not an Indian. He asserts that these statements were the fruit of the improper seizure and of a question asked of him the previous evening without the benefit of Miranda warnings. Terry received Miranda warnings are admissible because he knowingly and voluntarily waived his Miranda rights. His earlier unwarned statement did not result from coercion or a calculated effort to undermine his will. Terry was in an older. Terry was an Indian: Their common practice was to detain a suspect first and then determine race. Sergeant Ten Fingers was inside the Bettelyoun residence speaking with Ms. Terry that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="208"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/3E4DE43D42E1CE3788256BF1007E0FD2/$file/0115310.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: The O'Tooles have a ranch upstream from governmentowned property held in trust by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Is not protected by the discretionary function exception to the FTCA. Home Ranch's water and irrigation systems are supplied by the Reese River. Downstream on the Reese River from Home Ranch is Bowler Ranch. Bowler Ranch was purchased by the United States in 1937. The land is held in trust for the Shoshone Indian Tribe by the United States. Additional irrigation dams were built around 1980. The core of the government's argument is that the BIA has never had the resources necessary to repair the irrigation system on the Reservation. To address the needs that were most pressing in each fiscal year.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="208"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/210D4B8B66EE04A588256F6A005A4328/$file/0316654.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Stat. § 533.450 is an integral part of Nevada water law rather than a generally applicable rule of civil procedure. Manner or purpose of use of the waters to which [the party is] so entitled
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="208"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/new/release.pl?B1=Search+Month&month=09&date=01&year=04">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="208"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/04/99-7072.htm">99-7072 -- CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA V. U.S. -- 04/05/2000<BR></A><BR>
Plaintiff Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma appeals from the district court's entry of judgment in favor of defendant United States on its claim for a refund of federal wagering and occupational excise taxes which it alleges were unlawfully assessed against its pull tab gaming activities pursuant to 26 U.S.C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="207"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/00opinions/00-1098.html">STANLEY F. CERMAK, V. BRUCE BABBITT<BR></A><BR>
With him on the brief were <u>Lois J. ) are. The Department asserted that the Cermaks have no rights in the parcels and that the Department instead holds the land in trust for the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community. </p> <p ALIGN=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="207"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/08/03-6213.htm">03-6213 -- KAW NATION V. LUJAN -- 08/16/2004<BR></A><BR>
They contend that the district court erred in characterizing their claims as involving a purely intratribal dispute and assert that the district court had jurisdiction to determine whether certain persons were properly appointed to the Kaw Nation District Court (KNDC) and the Kaw Nation Supreme Court. Among the Executive Council's powers is that of selecting judges to the Tribe's supreme and inferior courts. The individual Plaintiffs are members of the Tribe and are or were members of its Executive Council. Clyde McCauley and Clark Pepper have been removed from the Executive Council. Martha Spotted Bear and Jesse Mehojah are the subject of removal proceedings. <p> The Executive Council selected Defendant Phil Lujan as judge of the KNDC on June 8. Plaintiffs contend that he was not properly confirmed under the Tribe's constitution and hence may not exercise judicial authority. Ruling that he was properly appointed under tribal
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="206"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/07/06/063480P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Concluding that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the parties were not diverse and the case did not arise under federal law. II.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="206"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/29CF79BB69A569228825726C00839C81/$file/0670430.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: Salmon and steelhead1 are two of the great natural A steelhead is a rainbow trout which has spent part of its life at sea. As these dams were constructed. Only about one million fish return for spawning that is essential to the species' survival in the Columbia River system. The Bonneville Power Administration (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="205"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/99/10/982707P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Rouse was convicted of second degree murder in Iowa and incarcerated there. He was transferred to the Minnesota Correctional Facility in Stillwater on March 31. Because some complaints were incomprehensible. Because it threatens prison security in the event an inmate is dissatisfied with a hired inmate's work product. Rouse indicated he was generally dissatisfied with his placement at Stillwater. While the transfer request was being processed. Rouse was transferred to the Iowa Department of Corrections on October 27. Benson's only involvement in the transfer was to sign the paperwork. Rouse was acting as a behind the scenes agitator. Whether these gatherings related to Native American spiritual practices or whether they were simply social. Security reasons prohibit inmates from congregating in the cell halls. 3 Lanz has continued to maintain that although Rouse claims to have drafted the initial complaint in an action brought by other inmates against prison officials entitled Chambers. Lanz was not aware of this lawsuit at the time the September 26.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="204"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/98opinions/98-5008.html">ALDER V. US<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="204"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/01/01-6046.htm">01-6046 -- U.S. V. SIMPSON -- 01/30/2002<BR></A><BR>
The cases are therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> In case number 01 6046. We have consolidated the two cases for procedural purposes. Who is a member of the Ponca Indian Tribe. Owned
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="204"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/05/00-7113.htm">00-7113 -- POUNDS V. DEPT. OF INTERIOR -- 05/16/2001<BR></A><BR>
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> Plaintiff Appellant Mary V. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="204"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/99opinions/99-5049.html">BROWN ERROL V. U.S.<BR></A><BR>
With her on the brief were <U>Peter Coppelman</U>. Of counsel on the brief were <U>Maria Wiseman</U>. Because we conclude that Brown has not alleged facts sufficient to toll the statute of limitations and these two claims had accrued more than six years prior to the day the suit was filed. We affirm.</P> <B><P ALIGN=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="203"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/02/02/012338U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Per capita distributions were made to Campbell. Congress had explicitly stated per capita distributions of income from tribal casinos are subject to federal taxation. 1994 were not taxable. 238 in debt discharged by the Farmers Home Administration in 1990 was eligible for exclusion from income as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="203"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/961814A.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
It is an authority constrained by no less a power than that of the People themselves. The constitution is written.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="202"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/F8F25FC93000BD9C88256C83006210DC/$file/0116637.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The purpose of the lease suspensions was to extend the lives of the leases and to allow the lessees to
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="202"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9E1069E47CAA213788256D6F0006D727/$file/0017146.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
First is the adjudication phase. The judicial decree defining the distribution of water rights is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="202"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/00/08/994288P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. Appellants are members of the Bois Forte Band of Chippewa Indians. A federally recognized tribe that was a signatory to the Treaty with the Chippewa of September 30. Shall have the right to hunt and fish therein. Until otherwise ordered by the President.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="202"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-1135.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
P.C.</SPAN> was on brief. Were on brief. We hold that under the new law such stays are guided by essentially the same standard that informs the grant or denial of preliminary injunctions. Only after we have set the stage do we turn to the issues that confront us.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="200"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/lognameprint.php">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Jerome Wayne Johnson</td> <td align=left valign=top>03 13595 / 03 00036 CR J 25 TEM</td> <td align=left valign=top><font color=red>07 12 2004</font></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=cccccc> <td colspan=3> </td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=cccccc> <td colspan=3> </td> </tr> <tr> <td align=left valign=top>In re: Will C. Bowman</td> <td align=left valign=top>02 13050 / 01 01345 CV BU E</td> <td align=left valign=top><font color=red>08 13 2003</font></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=cccccc> <td colspan=3> </td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=cccccc> <td colspan=3> </td> </tr> <tr> <td align=left valign=top>In re: Will C. Whose name in this complaint will be Dakota Allen v.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="200"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/4D5BA2EBBF41D5B088256AAE00584F27/$file/9916436.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The district court held that several of Chrysler's arguments were frivolous. We believe that removal was improper. Were not frivolous. That the exterior paint is prone to peel off. Chrysler sought a writ of mandamus from this court that would have required the district court to reconsider its remand order and its denial of limited discovery. Code § 1780(a). 2 The named plaintiffs are citizens of California. Defendant Chrysler was a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Michigan. The complete diversity requirement in class actions is based on the citizenship of the named plaintiffs at the time the action is filed. The citizenship of unnamed class members is disregarded. Also that several of its arguments were
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="200"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/lognameprint2.php">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Whose name in this complaint will be Dakota Allen v. Bowman</td> <td align=left valign=top>02 13050 / 01 01345 CV BU E</td> <td align=left valign=top><font color=red>08 13 2003</font></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=cccccc> <td colspan=3> </td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=cccccc> <td colspan=3> </td> </tr> <tr> <td align left valign=top>In re: Will C. Cohen</td> <td align=left valign=top>03 13162 / 02 23079 CV KMM</td> <td align=left valign=top><font color=red>07 08 2004</font></td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=cccccc> <td colspan=3> </td> </tr> <tr bgcolor=cccccc> <td colspan=3> </td> </tr> <tr> <td align left valign=top>In re: Will C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="200"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/01/01-1958.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Was tribal chairman from 1994 to 1997. Ackley was sentenced to thirty months imprisonment and three years of supervised release on Counts II and (continued...) 2 No. 01 1958 ant's motion for judgment of acquittal on Count I which charged a conspiracy
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="200"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/CC50480B6B69D9DC88256E5A00707C63/$file/9916436.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The district court held that several of Chrysler's arguments were frivolous. We believe that removal was improper. Were not frivolous. That the exterior paint is prone to peel off. Chrysler sought a writ of mandamus from this court that would have required the district court to reconsider its remand order and its denial of limited discovery. Code § 1780(a). 2 The named plaintiffs are citizens of California. Defendant Chrysler was a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Michigan. The complete diversity requirement in class actions is based on the citizenship of the named plaintiffs at the time the action is filed. The citizenship of unnamed class members is disregarded. Also that several of its arguments were
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="200"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/03/042185P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Because we conclude upon de novo review that the plaintiffs have standing. Were registered members of the Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation in North Dakota. Included among these lands were Allotments 3016 (a.k.a. It is undisputed that. It is also undisputed that the mortgages gave the FSA the right. Ernest was to receive Allotment 1366 consisting of five acres. Harry was to receive Mollie's interest in Allotment 176A consisting of 133.42 acres. Virginia was to receive Allotments 371 and 1357 collectively consisting of 80 acres. Were to receive the rest and residue of Virginia's estate. His estate was probated in 1997. It was determined that Ernest was Harry's sole heir. Land that Harry did receive or should have received from Mollie's estate passed or should have passed to Ernest. Probate proceedings regarding Ernest's estate were not commenced until 2003. Although the parties agree that probate is still open on Ernest's estate. The plaintiffs allege that Ernest's heirs are Virgil.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="200"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/june96/95-2191.wpd.html">OLGUIN V. LUCERO<BR></A><BR>
Mora are members of the Isleta Tribe residing on tribal lands. Appellees are former and current members of the Isleta Tribal Council. Was evicted from the reservation by order of the Tribal Council. Appellants were served with a temporary restraining order that was issued on Ms. Olguin was suspended without pay from her employment with the Tribal Police for fifteen days. Olguin's appeals of the suspension were denied by tribal authorities. Mora
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="200"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-5112.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. BACKGROUND The plaintiffs are descendants of Osage Indians listed on the tribal rolls at the time of the Osage Allotment Act of 1906. Their complaint asserts four causes of action: (1) a claim that the defendants (1) This order and judgment is not binding precedent. 640 F.2d 269 (10th Cir. 1981). <hr> The court first concluded that the Tribal Council was a necessary party under Fed. Reasoning that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-2.gif" ALT="200"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200611582.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: At issue today is whether the district court erred in dismissing. We conclude that the district court did indeed have subject matter jurisdiction. Have various usury laws that generally prohibit such high interest loans. No one doubts that when so called
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="199"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/02/00-1145.htm">00-1145 -- CONCRETE WORKS OF COLORADO INC. V. CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER -- 02/10/2003<BR></A><BR>
Denver has amended the ordinance twice since this lawsuit was initiated but it remains essentially unchanged for purposes of this case. <p> In 1993. A bench trial was held and the district court entered judgment in favor of CWC on its claims for injunctive and declaratory relief. <em>See Concrete Works of Colorado. CWC's entitlement to damages was reserved and the district court directed entry of judgment under Rule 54(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. <em>See</em> <em>id</em>. at 1044. Anecdotal evidence which are discussed respectively in subsections IV.A. <a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="198"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/99/01/973283P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Under which Turn Key was to develop. All costs of constructing and equipping the project were to be advanced by Turn Key and repaid out of the revenues from operations according to a set formula. First is a Promissory Note Master Installment Note1 in which the Tribe agreed to pay Turn Key up to $4. Second is a Security Agreement and Financing Statement wherein the Tribe granted a This Note is in addition to the Note between Turn Key's shareholders and Miller & Schroeder. Third is an agreement entitled Consent and Estoppel of the Oglala Sioux Tribe. Consent and Estoppel were enforceable. Since the primary issues in the existing action concern whether the Management Agreement was broken and whether either party is entitled to damages. A party will be permitted to intervene in an action
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="197"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Nov2001/002257.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Which was previously operated as a monopoly overseen by the several states. Conditions of such arrangements are set forth in interconnection agreements established between the carriers. The state utility commissions are empowered. Arguing that they were immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment of the United States Constitution. The PUC and Verizon each appealed and the appeals were consolidated. We have jurisdiction over the final decision of a District Court. We conclude that the PUC and the Commissioners are not entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity from suit in federal court under the 1996 Act. We will. We will affirm the District Court in part and reverse it in part. Is able to compete with an ILEC without having to bear the prohibitive cost of building its own telecommunications network. Both an ILEC and a CLEC are required to
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="197"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/08/00-2136.htm">00-2136 -- JOSEPH V. INGRAM -- 08/22/2001<BR></A><BR>
Stable families. <p> Three years after the suit was filed and certified as a class action. The first decree was vacated and replaced with a second decree in September 1998. The Department countered with a motion to dismiss on the grounds that the suit is barred by New Mexico's sovereign immunity and that the district court should abstain from hearing the case pursuant to <u>Younger v. The Department cross appeals the district court's rejection of its Eleventh Amendment argument.<strong></strong> <p> <strong> </strong>We conclude that Appellants' claims under the Social Security Act are barred by the Eleventh Amendment. Appellants' constitutional claims are barred by the <u>Younger</u> . The background to this appeal is relatively straightforward. The district court approved the settlement and entered a consent decree (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="197"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/3AE1FD6FDAF8976288256ACD00750FAD/$file/0155770.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: We must decide whether a wholesale energy supplier is entitled to injunctive relief from orders issued by the Governor of California commandeering its contractual rights to deliver electricity to public utilities within the state. I A The electricity contracts at issue in this appeal are the products of the restructuring of the California electricity market. The CalPX was deemed a public utility under the Federal Power Act (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="197"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/8298DE974677E21388256E5A00707CD8/$file/0155770.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: We must decide whether a wholesale energy supplier is entitled to injunctive relief from orders issued by the Governor of California commandeering its contractual rights to deliver electricity to public utilities within the state. I A The electricity contracts at issue in this appeal are the products of the restructuring of the California electricity market. The CalPX was deemed a public utility under the Federal Power Act (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/August2002/012782.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The principal issue on appeal is whether the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania waived its sovereign immunity by accepting certain federal funds for the Department of Corrections. We will reverse in part and affirm in part. George Koslow was hired by the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections as a water treatment plant supervisor for the State Correctional Institute in Graterford. He was dismissed for being unable to perform
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="196"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/09/02-2323.htm">02-2323 -- O CENTERO ESPRITA BENEFICIENTE UNIAO DO VEGETAL V. ASHCROFT -- 09/04/2003<BR></A><BR>
The district court granted UDV's motion for a preliminary injunction in a unpublished Memorandum Opinion and Order.<a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="195"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/02/02-1425.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Two months later the Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe of Michigan (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="195"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/B5D60B389785284288256F3B00544169/$file/0335461.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
KS Wild claims that the EAs are legally insufficient because (1) they fail to adequately evaluate and discuss the potential cumulative environmental impacts posed by the sales in combination with other major activities in the watershed. Should all have been discussed in a single NEPA document. BACKGROUND The SFLBC watershed is classified as a Tier 1 Key Watershed under the Northwest Forest Plan. Tier 1 Watersheds are river basins that are deemed to contribute directly to the survival and restoration of at risk salmonids. The plan to harvest SFLBC timber was originally conceived as a single project. The reason for dividing the project is not entirely clear. The record indicates that the BLM's primary motivation was the desire to proceed expediently with the project or projects. The first analyses to be completed were for the Indian Soda and Conde Shell sales. Because those were the only two for KLAMATH SISKIYOU WILDLANDS CENTER v. While there was no immediate harvest activity on the Conde Shell project. STANDARDS OF REVIEW A
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="195"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/11/97-1158.htm">97-1158 -- BRANSON SCHOOL DISTRICT RE-82 V. ROMER -- 11/20/1998<BR></A><BR>
That first state constitution responded to the federal government's grant of lands for common schools by establishing a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="195"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/02a0170p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Bollinger Page 3 appeal the district court's determination that the Law School's consideration of race and ethnicity in its admissions decisions violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.1 The Law School contends that its interest in achieving a diverse student body is compelling under Regents of the University of California v. That its admissions policy is narrowly tailored to serve that interest. The Law School is joined by the Intervenors: forty one individuals and three student groups. The policy states that the Law School's
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="193"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/05/963733P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Schwartz learned that the three were hunting a moose. Accompanied Vasquez on the Stone testified that he radioed from the plane and informed the Stone stated that Stone admitted hunters on the ground of the location of the moose. during that flight they chased a moose towards the hunters on the ground and that he witnessed the hunters shoot and kill the moose. that he knew the activities were illegal. Vasquez were indicted for violating the Airborne Hunting Act. Stone argues that 18 U.S.C. § 1162 (popularly known as Public Law 280) confers jurisdiction upon the state and not the federal courts.4 Stone contends that the enactment of section 1162 was the result of Congress's desire
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="193"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/unpub/02/02-41030.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 1 * The Alabama Coushatta Tribe of Texas sought a declaratory judgment that highstakes gaming activities on tribal lands are lawful and enjoining the State of Texas from interfering with such gaming activities. As we are bound by this court's decision in Ysleta del Sur Pueblo v. The Act also provided that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="192"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200511/05-5068a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were Peter D. With him on the brief were Dennis M. The means by which they were to fulfill this duty. The defendants argue that reissuance of the injunction was an abuse of discretion. In trust for the sole use and benefit of the Indian to whom such allotment shall have been made.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="192"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/02/98-7027.htm">98-7027 -- DRY V. CFR COURT OF INDIAN OFFENSES FOR THE CHOCTAW NATION -- 02/22/1999<BR></A><BR>
Are Choctaw Indians charged with various violations of the Choctaw Criminal Code. Concluding Appellants were not
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="191"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/29B40D5DCB7AF7BD88256C31005986D3/$file/0135014.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The government argues that Ramsey's prior federal lawsuit challenging a similar Washington state tax is not controlling. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We agree that the Treaty is the relevant starting point. The federal standard requires a definite expression of exemption stated plainly in a statute or treaty before any further inquiry is made or any canon of interpretation employed. BACKGROUND Ramsey is a member of the federally recognized Yakama Indian Tribe (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="191"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/B2A207368066A25688256A11005C741C/$file/9935956.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Thompson is substituted for his predecessor. Age when his position was abolished and he failed to obtain another position through the Civil Service bumping process. Foss was a sixty two year old white male employed for more than twenty years as a social 3374 worker at the IHS's Portland Area Office (PAO). One of those positions was Foss's social worker position. Was the only person in his competitive level. A person whose position is abolished has a right to bump into a position for which he is qualified if the position is held by another person less senior. Was classified in 1993 as a Managed Care Coordinator/ Nurse Specialist. The applicable job description stated that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="191"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/11/97-2188.htm">97-2188 -- ELEPHANT BUTTE IRRIGATION DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO V. DEPT. OF THE INTERIOR -- 11/06/1998<BR></A><BR>
The district court also ruled Plaintiffs are entitled to their lawful share of net profits. 2043 (1997) (stating the question before the Court
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="191"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/81BB7043B60AE1A388256E5A00707A9C/$file/9935956.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Thompson is substituted for his predecessor. Age when his position was abolished and he failed to obtain another position through the Civil Service bumping process. Foss was a sixty two year old white male employed for more than twenty years as a social 3374 worker at the IHS's Portland Area Office (PAO). One of those positions was Foss's social worker position. Was the only person in his competitive level. A person whose position is abolished has a right to bump into a position for which he is qualified if the position is held by another person less senior. Was classified in 1993 as a Managed Care Coordinator/ Nurse Specialist. The applicable job description stated that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="191"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/11/97-2188a.htm">97-2188A -- ELEPHANT BUTTE IRRIGATION DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO V. DEPT. OF THE INTERIOR -- 11/06/1998<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judges. <p> <hr align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="190"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=96-1619.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Carroll and Blish & Cavanagh were on brief. Snow & Hahn were on brief. Baccarat is a subsidiary of Compagnie des Cristalleries de Baccarat. It is the exclusive distributor in the United States of this aristocratic product line. Is generated through catalog and telemarketing sales. L.L.C. are all named plaintiffs herein. For simplicity's sake we refer to them collectively as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="188"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/new/release.pl?B1=Search+Month&month=02&date=01&year=98">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="188"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/03/10/021703P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
United States District Judge for the District of South Dakota. 1 argues that the departure was unwarranted and that the government breached its plea agreement.2 We disagree and affirm the sentence of the district court. Archambault's counsel was not present during this interview. The Probation Office determined that Archambault's offense level was nine. His criminal history category was I. His sentencing guidelines range was four to ten months. We would have reviewed a district court's upward departure for an abuse of discretion. Recent legislative changes have modified our standard.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="187"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/00opinions/00-3449.html">LOIS DELONG V. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES<BR></A><BR>
Argued for respondent.<span style=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="185"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/DEA68600F890FF99882571E60083AAFE/$file/0416401.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Appeal is made by the several parties dissatisfied with the decision of the district court awarding the funds in dispute to the Class of Human Rights Victims represented by Mariano Pimentel (Pimentel). INC. the Republic) are not indispensable parties under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19(b). PARTIES AND PROCEEDINGS Interpleader was begun on September 21. The Merrill Lynch account was found by the district court to have been established in 1972 by a deposit of $2 million by Ferdinand E. Are now held in escrow by the Philippine National Bank. The Republic was made a defendant in the interpleader and successfully asserted its sovereign immunity. The Republic now maintains that it is an indispensable party inasmuch as the Republic asserts that the Arelma assets were acquired by Marcos illegally and never lawfully belonged to him but from the beginning of his acquisition belonged to the Republic. See An Act Declaring Forfeiture in Favor of the State of Any Property Found to Have Been Unlawfully Acquired by Any Public Officer or Employee and Providing for the Proceeding Therefor.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="185"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/450024AFB685A4A2882571630069D0E9/$file/0416401.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Appeal is made by the several parties dissatisfied with the decision of the district court awarding the funds in dispute to the Class of Human Rights Victims represented by Mariano Pimental (Pimental). The Republic) are not indispensable parties under Fed. PARTIES AND PROCEEDINGS Interpleader was begun on September 21. The Merrill Lynch account was found by the district court to have been established in 1992 by a deposit of $2 million by Ferdinand E. Are now held in escrow by the Philippine National Bank. The Republic was made a defendant in the interpleader and successfully asserted its sovereign immunity. The Republic now maintains that it is an indispensable party inasmuch as the Republic asserts that the Arelma assets were acquired by Marcos illegally and never lawfully belonged to 5036 MERRILL LYNCH v. See An Act Declaring Forfeiture in Favor of the State of Any Property Found to Have Been Unlawfully Acquired by Any Public Officer or Employee and Providing for the Proceeding Therefor. We ruled that the Republic was a necessary party but declined to rule that the Republic was indispensable.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="185"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0398p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
This decision was originally issued as an
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="185"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200607/05-5388a.pdf">O:\SCHNABEL\2006-04 CASES\COBELL V. NORTON\COBEL OPINION DRAFT 7 FORMATTED (WITH MIKE MCGRAIL'S CHANGES).WPD<BR></A><BR>
With him on the briefs were Peter D. With him on the brief were Elliott H. Because we conclude the court's broad grant of equitable relief was an abuse of discretion. The Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of the Interior are currently the designated trustee delegates for the Individual Indian Money (IIM) trust. Interior is responsible for executing most of the government's trust duties. Interior's Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) is responsible for managing the lands held by the trust. That some of Interior's employees were thwarting efforts to test the security of Interior's IT systems. The district court had erroneously shifted the burden of persuasion to Interior to show why disconnection was unnecessary. As material facts were in dispute and almost nine months had passed since a previous hearing. The class members argue that Interior's arguments are foreclosed by Cobell XII. We are not bound by the later opinions. The alleged conflict is illusory. Though some degree of confusion is understandable.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="182"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/05/973107P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Golman Dillon was terminated by the Yankton Sioux Housing Authority (Authority). Claiming that he was fired because he is white. He was responsible for. Dillon claims that he was terminated because he is white and brought suit under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981. Was properly granted due to sovereign immunity. Claim or obligation arising out of its activities under this ordinance and hereby authorizes the Authority to agree by contract to waive any immunity from suit which it might otherwise have. Dillon contends that the Authority was a corporation created by the Tribe and should be subject to suit like any other corporate entity created by the United States. 5 summary judgment is appropriate only where there is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="182"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/5E8290FB85CEDC2688256FBA0006B0A9/$file/0136133.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Appearing at 361 F.3d 1108 (9th Cir. 2004) is amended as follows: OCEAN ADVOCATES v. The New platform facilitates an increase in tanker traffic and is a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="182"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/D595775D7821C51A88256E55007CA045/$file/0136133.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Cherry Point Marine Terminal Cherry Point is an approximately ten mile stretch of coastline located in the Strait of Georgia in northeast Puget Sound. The Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO) was the original party to this suit. Physical adjustments enabled the southern platform both to unload crude oil and to load refined product so that the dock could function as it would have with both platforms. BP sought to have the 1969 permit reopened in 1977 so that it could complete the original design of the pier by building the northern platform. Before the permit was issued.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="182"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/11/02-2038.htm">02-2038 -- U.S. V. BROWN -- 11/15/2002<BR></A><BR>
Leroy Thompson</em> <p> Leroy Thompson is a member of the Navajo Nation and the Native American Church. II App. 286 <em>et seq.</em> He was a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="182"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/260FAB8F1F86F35288256F2D00818B87/$file/0330482.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: Kim Renee Smith (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="182"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200602/05-7029a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
On the briefs were Lawrence I. With him on the brief were Peter D. Because FRA section 734 provides that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="180"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-1604OPN.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Was on brief. <SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="179"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/99/12/973935U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
He had submitted uncontroverted evidence establishing that Charles Mix County owns in fee simple the land upon which the County Jail is located. That the land is not part of a recognized Indian community. That the land is not held in trust for any Indian tribe. While the district court's conclusion was correct under then existing law. We recently concluded that the Yankton Sioux Reservation
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="179"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/89905E37452D8DDD88256E5A00707D2E/$file/9915614.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Insurers allege that MERLO is preempted by the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response. Health & Safety (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="179"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/8D9B522DE32A804C88256B3B0000C4AB/$file/9915614.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
2001 is amended as follows: 1) The opinion's list of counsel for the defendantsappellees. The first three sentences of the first full paragraph should be replaced by the following: 235
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="179"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0739n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
This appeal is the latest episode in a 32 year old dispute between the United States and the State of Michigan regarding the interpretation and enforcement of the 1836 Treaty of Washington. We will affirm. I. This litigation has a lengthy history which is only briefly reviewed here. Encompassing large portions of what is now the State of Michigan and the Great Lakes. Until the land is required for settlement.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="179"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/03/00-4113.htm">00-4113 -- U.S. V. GARDNER -- 03/22/2001<BR></A><BR>
Gardner was driving Dorene Arthur in her pickup truck north of Whiterocks. It was disputed as to whether Ms. The elk was near an opening in a fence that ran along the east side of the road. Thornton were present. Thornton each stated that the elk was shot with Ms. Were tape recorded and summarized in a one page report. The tape was later lost. The remains were located approximately 100 yards east of Whiterock Road at the end of a trail of faint tire prints that passed through an opening in a barbed wire fence. <p> After concluding that the elk had been shot on tribal land. Elk hunting was permitted only between September 21 and October 20 during daylight. A permit and membership in the Ute Tribe were required. He testified that the land on which the remains were found and the surrounding area. Was tribal land. <p> There was conflicting testimony as to the orientation of the remains with reference to the hatchery. Both tribal officers testified that the location was northeast of the hatchery. Thornton that he
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="179"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/B09FA7717F18D78588256AF50001E5AF/$file/9915614.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Insurers allege that MERLO is preempted by the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response. Health & Safety (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="178"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/jan97/96-2039.wpd.html">UNITED STATES V. CHIQUITO<BR></A><BR>
Jr. was charged in the first count of a four count indictment with having sexual contact. Chiquito was charged with having sexual contact on or between about April 1. Chiquito was charged with engaging in a sexual act. Chiquito was charged with engaging in a sexual act. Each count was based on a different incident. It was the intent of the government to qualify Ms. Though we are not sure. That a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="178"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/01/01-2019.htm">01-2019 -- STATE OF NEW MEXICO V. POJOAQUE -- 01/31/2002<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judges. <p> <hr align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="178"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/11/003998P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. Bear Robe was convicted in federal court of voluntary manslaughter in 1975. Because Bear Robe was 20 years old at the time. The conviction was later set aside under the Federal Youth Corrections Act (FYCA). Loneman School is a nonprofit corporation chartered by the Oglala Sioux Tribal Council and administered by the Loneman School Board. The Act requires each Indian tribal organization that receives funding under the Tribally Controlled Schools Act of 1988 to conduct investigations of each individual who is employed in a position that involves regular The Honorable Richard H. Those standards must include a provision prohibiting the employment of the following described persons: The minimum standards of character that are to be prescribed under this section shall ensure that none of the individuals appointed to positions [that involve regular contact with or control over Indian children] have been found guilty of. Bear Robe was suspended and given a hearing before the school board. Bear Robe was terminated in April 1999.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="178"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/99opinions/99-5083.html">LITTLE SIX, INC V. U.S.<BR></A><BR>
For plaintiffs appellants.<span style=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="176"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-6125.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The district court dismissed the habeas elements of the petition (1) This order is not binding precedent. The cause is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <hr> for failure to exhaust state court remedies. Background Archilta is a Native American incarcerated in an Oklahoma prison after being sentenced to six. He also sought class representative status on behalf of all other Oklahoma citizens who are Native Americans and are incarcerated in Oklahoma prisons for crimes committed in Oklahoma. City) who are citizens of the State of Oklahoma. [are] employed as a State. He contends (1) that claims for treaty violations are not typical. (2) he would have filed a 2254 petition if he had intended to do so. The petition filed in the district court sought relief in the form of a declaratory judgment that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="175"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/28474A1DA5D4DBD788256ECF008247BB/$file/0217163.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: The central question in this Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) suit is whether the two private entities that stage the 9208 DISABLED RIGHTS v. So are responsible for assuring compliance with the ADA's public accommodation physical accessibility requirements. Also at issue is whether the suit can proceed without the participation of the University and Community College System of Nevada (University System). We further conclude that University System is not a necessary party under Rule 19. Factual History BACKGROUND Disabled Rights Action Committee (Disabled Rights) is a non profit organization that advocates for the rights of people with disabilities. The Rodeo is an annual competition sponsored by the Professional Rodeo Cowboys Association (Cowboys) and presented by Las Vegas Events (Events). The License Agreement that is currently in effect was not part of the district court record. These licensing agreements are documents of the University System. 689 (9th Cir. 2001) (explaining that a court may judicially notice matters of public record unless the matter is a fact subject to reasonable dispute).
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="175"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/97opinions/97-5049.html">DOYON, LIMITED V. U.S.<BR></A><BR>
With him on the brief were <U>Christopher M. With him on the brief were <U>Loretta C. Limited (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="175"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/06/03-5035.htm">03-5035 -- QUARLES V. U.S. STATES OF AMERICA -- 06/16/2004<BR></A><BR>
Drummond (Will K. Circuit Judge. <p> <hr align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="175"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=06-1774.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
<span style=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="174"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021364.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Was correct. The mark is registered in Monaco. Are five companies formed and controlled by a French national. Included in this roster are 53 web sites whose domain addresses incorporate some portion of the term
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="174"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/09/02-8009.htm">02-8009 -- WYOMING SAWMILLS INCORPORATED V. U.S. FOREST SERVICE -- 09/20/2004<BR></A><BR>
Named as defendants in the complaint were the Forest Service. The Secretary of Agriculture (who is the cabinet officer with authority over the Forest Service). All of whom will be referred to herein as the Forest Service or just the Service. The Medicine Wheel Coalition on Sacred Sites of North America was permitted to intervene in the district court and is aligned with the Service as an appellee in this court. <p> <center><strong>I</strong></center> <p> The Medicine Wheel National Historic Landmark was created in 1969 to preserve the Medicine Wheel. A prehistoric stone circle about 80 feet in diameter that was constructed by the aboriginal peoples of North America. Although the age of the structure is unknown. Other artifacts and traces of human habitation are found in the vicinity. A number of Native American tribes consider the Wheel to be sacred. <p> The Medicine Wheel is located on Medicine Mountain in the Bighorn National Forest in north central Wyoming. Approximately 200 acres in the Bighorn National Forest were set aside for the preservation of the Wheel.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="173"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/03/02-4230.htm">02-4230 -- BLACKBEAR V. NORTON -- 03/05/2004<BR></A><BR>
</strong> <a name=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="173"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/oct96/94-6377.wpd.html">UNITED STATES V. STONER<BR></A><BR>
1996 Please be advised of the following correction to the captioned decision: Judge Briscoe's dissent should have been attached to Judge Henry's opinion in this case. Stoner contends that the district court should have granted her motion for judgment of acquittal because the government failed to allege and prove that an overt act occurred within the applicable statute of limitations. Stoner is a member of the Ponca Indian Tribe. She was elected to the Ponca Tribal Business Committee (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="173"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/opinions%20by%20date?OpenView&Start=1&Count=100&Expand=8.1#8.1">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="173"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/99/01/981648P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Irvin Couvillion presiding. in 1992 was taxable as ordinary income and that certain unreimbursed travel expenses were not adequately substantiated. The Commissioner of Internal Revenue supports the court's rulings on these issues but points out that no additional tax is due under 26 U.S.C. § 6651(a)(2) because that section does not apply. The lease was to terminate on all or part of the land. If the Community were to notify him before January 1 of any year that it would need the land for economic development the following summer. This lease was approved by the Minneapolis Area Director of the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Some of his possessions were lost when the trailers were removed. The matters have apparently not yet been finally resolved. Campbell's tax status was also affected. The income he received from farming was not taxable by the federal government. They are normally taxable under 25 U.S.C. § 2710(b)(3)(D). The IRS acknowledged that he was entitled to a self employment tax deduction of $138. These additions were based on failure to file a timely return ($1.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="172"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/02/044029P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Which money was never refunded by the proposed sellers when the conveyance was not completed. The agreement was only effective in the event The Honorable Richard H. United States District Judge for the District of South Dakota. 2 1 approval was received. 056.14 for the trust land even before Secretarial approval was obtained for the transfer. The Cudmores agreed to return Thorstenson's payments attributed to the trust land in the event that conveyance of the trust land was not ultimately approved by the Secretary. Was not part of this suit) for fraud and breach of contract over the land sale. After the evidence was presented to the jury. Were not recorded. Based upon his We have no information regarding the nearly fifteen year lapse between the originating contracts and the creation of the escrow account. 3 2 understanding that it was dismissed without prejudice. This ruling was never appealed. D. State Court Proceedings Against Virginia Cudmore Grover died in February 1997 and Virginia tentatively received a life estate in the trust property under the terms of Grover's Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)approved will.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="170"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/04/99-4104.htm">99-4104 -- STATE OF UTAH V. U.S. DEPT. OF THE INTERIOR -- 04/25/2000<BR></A><BR>
We review de novo and conclude the action is not yet ripe for judicial review. <u>See</u> . The effect on the environment of the uses to which the leased lands will be subject. <p> As required by
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="169"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-2702_028.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Two of the firefighters who were forced to retire under the MRO filed suit on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated. That mandatory 2 No. 05 2702 retirement of firefighters was not contrary to the ADEA. These two agreements were identical. Seniority is defined as an employee's length of continuous service since his last date of hire. . . . ... Is discharged for just cause. Retires or is retired. Is absent for three (3) consecutive days (workdays) without notifying the Employer's authorized representative. Is laid off and fails to report for work within ten (10) calendar days after mailing . . . a notification of recall . . . A more complete history is set forth in our opinion in Kopec v. No exception was made for individuals employed as police officers and firefighters. Age limits were permitted only to the extent that employers could establish that age was a bona fide occupational qualification for the job. Those doubts were put to rest by the Supreme Court's decision in E.E.O.C. v. Congress amended the ADEA to exempt from the statutory ban on age discrimination any state or local age limits on public safety personnel which were in place as of March 3.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="169"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/07/041202P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. Drapeau was convicted based on information the Northern Plains Safe Trail Drug Enforcement Task Force (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="169"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/99/11/991037U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Who were all ten to twelve year old Native American girls. Into a restroom where the girls demonstrated that each was in fact a female. The Custer School District (where the Hermosa School is located). Concluding that plaintiffs had failed to come forward with evidence tending to prove that the conduct of any defendant was motivated by race. The court granted summary judgment dismissing with prejudice all state law claims against the Loneman School on the ground that plaintiffs' exclusive remedy is under the Federal Tort Claims Act because the Loneman School is operated by the Oglala Sioux Tribe pursuant to a grant from the Bureau of Indian Affairs and is therefore deemed to be part of the BIA for FTCA purposes. Plaintiffs first argue that the district court erred in granting summary judgment before discovery was complete. This claim is without merit because plaintiffs fail to show that they sought a continuance from the district court to complete additional discovery that was necessary for a proper determination of the summary judgment motions.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="169"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200412354.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
York (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/12/98-6129.htm">98-6129 -- U.S. V. HAWKINS -- 12/02/1998<BR></A><BR>
Defense counsel subsequently moved to withdraw on the ground that the appeal is frivolous. <u>See</u> <u>Anders v. 2244 is a part]. Of sexual contact with a minor is one of those enumerated offenses. His prosecution. <p> Defense counsel next argues that the information charging Defendant was inadequate because it failed to allege that the victim was an Indian. Defendant's challenge to the sufficiency of the information is baseless. The government need only prove that Defendant is an Indian. This argument is foreclosed both by the facts of the case and the language of the plea agreement. Defendant as part of his plea agreed to the following: <p> The parties further agree that the United States has advised this defendant and his attorney and said defendant fully understands that although he is charged with a violation of 18 U.S.C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=05-4044.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/05/01-7084.htm">01-7084 -- POUNDS V. KILLION -- 05/23/2002<BR></A><BR>
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> Plaintiff appellant Richard Pounds appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment to defendant Dee Killion. Plaintiff was. Plaintiff and Mary Pounds have since married. <p> The district court has recited the numerous court orders and hearings that have preceded this case in tribal. We will not repeat those here. The upshot is that Mary Pounds' grandchildren have now been adopted by another family. Plaintiff asserts that defendant's role in this matter was tortious under various state law theories and that she violated his constitutional rights to equal protection. 1981. <p> Plaintiff's complaint states that defendant was employed by the Eastern Shawnee Tribal Business Council as the Tribe's Indian Child Welfare Worker and . That she was an officer of the Court of Indian Offenses Children's Division. He further states that defendant is an
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/08/02-4149.htm">02-4149 -- SKULL VALLEY BAND OF GOSHUTE INDIANS V. NIELSON -- 08/04/2004<BR></A><BR>
Appeal the district court's ruling that the state's statutes regulating the storage and transportation of spent nuclear fuel are preempted by federal law. <u>See</u> <u>Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians v. The Utah officials argue that the district court should not have reached the merits of this dispute because (1) the plaintiffs who challenge the statutes
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="166"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//2nd-idx.html">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Eleventh Circuit
OPINION/ORDER
Because we determine that the District Court erred in not giving proper deference to a tribal court finding that the plans were not authorized under tribal law. Are former employees of LSI who served as chief executive officer. The LSI board of directors was replaced in its entirety. LSI took the position that both the draft plans and the trusts were not validly created and that the trust funds should be returned to LSI. Seeking the court's guidance about the legal status of the draft plans and the appropriate distribution of assets in the trust. 2 While the tribal court action was pending. Holding that the Plaintiffs were required to exhaust their tribal remedies before the district court could exercise jurisdiction. Though there was no written record memorializing approval of the plans by the LSI board of directors. The
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
Petitioner United Urban Indian Council. The award was upheld by an administrative law judge (ALJ) and the DOL's Administrative Review Board. We have jurisdiction under 29 U.S.C.
OPINION/ORDER
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. Native Americans who assert that they have been injured through actions taken by the Ute Tribe and the State of Utah. Appeal from a district court order insofar as it dismissed with prejudice their claims against Utah state judges Lynn Payne and John Anderson and Ute Tribal Court chief judge Floyd Wyasket.(1) The initial and amended pleadings plaintiffs filed in the district court were vague and variable in focus. Plaintiffs have failed to file a transcript of the hearing at which the district court explained its rationale for decision. We affirm. (1) This order and judgment is not binding precedent. Though the other pro se plaintiffs were listed as appellants. An amended notice was filed shortly thereafter with all of the necessary signatures. All plaintiffs are therefore proper appellants. 68789 (5th Cir. 2003) (per curiam). The thrust of plaintiffs' original complaint was that Ute Tribal officials had improperly conveyed unspecified portions of Uintah and Ouray Reservation lands to the State of Utah and several cities and counties.
OPINION/ORDER
The petitions for rehearing en banc were circulated to the full court and no judge requested a vote on the petitions. Lodi's motion for judicial notice in support of its petition for rehearing is GRANTED. The petitions for rehearing and rehearing en banc are DENIED. 2002 and reported at 2002 WL 1792612 is hereby amended as follows: At page *17. That MERLO's provisions dealing with cleanup procedures are preempted by CERCLA only to the extent that they permit Lodi to order use of procedures more stringent than the NCP
Who are joined herein for purposes of relief by way of damages as may be appropriate. We AFFIRM.
Background
Plaintiffs appellants in this action are: (1) Kenmen Engineering. Miles is the principal. Defendant appellee is the City of Union City. The order is found to not be necessary and if there are any costs [plaintiffs] may want to come back against the City of Union City for the payment of costs and moving and storage . . . . Menz were both present at the March 12. There is no indication that the Oklahoma state court conducted a hearing at this time. Miles
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
Lois J. A Hispanic woman with a history of physical disabilitywas employed by the Sandia Casino (
OPINION/ORDER
Are engaged in the business of managing Indian casinos. The settlement was made in 1998. The Parties have entered into a resolution of their business differences
OPINION/ORDER
The Insurers allege that MERLO is preempted by the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response. Health & Safety (
OPINION/ORDER
No. 02 3861 Oforji is a Nigerian citizen who sought entry into the United States at Chicago on April 4. An initial hearing before an IJ was held on August 28. Wherein Oforji admitted that she was an alien not in possession of a valid immigration document at the time of her entry. Oforji testified that she is a member of the Ogoni Tribe of Nigeria and that the Tribe lived without roads. She claims to have fled Nigeria to avoid arrest because she was too
OPINION/ORDER
We are called upon to determine whether a federal agent's interrogation of Shawn Percy violated his Sixth Amendment right to counsel because the interrogation occurred in the absence of counsel. We hold that the interrogation was proper because. Within days was arrested by Sergeant Stephanie Nelson of the Gila River Tribal Police Department who was accompanied by three other tribal officers and three Maricopa County Sheriff's Deputies. Nelson was cross certified to act as an agent of both the Bureau of Indian Affairs and Maricopa County. Her actions failed to comply with the statutory mechanism for apprehending and extraditing an individual who is located outside the boundaries of Indian country. Would have held Percy in custody until the tribe initiated extradition procedures. Was not compromised by Sgt. Once Percy was within the territorial jurisdiction of the Gila River Tribal Court. 664 (1992) (noting the longstanding rule that a court may exercise jurisdiction even when a defendant's presence is the result of forcible abduction).
OPINION/ORDER
We are called upon to determine whether a federal agent's interrogation of Shawn Percy violated his Sixth Amendment right to counsel because the interrogation occurred in the absence of counsel. We hold that the interrogation was proper because. Within days was arrested by Sergeant Stephanie Nelson of the Gila River Tribal Police Department who was accompanied by three other tribal officers and three Maricopa County Sheriff's Deputies. Nelson was cross certified to act as an agent of both the Bureau of Indian Affairs and Maricopa County. Her actions failed to comply with the statutory mechanism for apprehending and extraditing an individual who is located outside the boundaries of Indian country. Would have held Percy in custody until the tribe initiated extradition procedures. Was not compromised by Sgt. Once Percy was within the territorial jurisdiction of the Gila River Tribal Court. 664 (1992) (noting the longstanding rule that a court may exercise jurisdiction even when a defendant's presence is the result of forcible abduction).
OPINION/ORDER
It concluded certain instances of Deschenie's speech were unprotected. Those which were protected were not causally related to the adverse employment actions taken by the School Board. Background Deschenie was the Director of Indian Education and Bilingual Education for CCSD from August 2000 through June 2003. She was the Bilingual Education Coordinator. CCSD is a school district located mostly within the Navajo Indian Reservation in San Juan County. 6500 of its 7000 students are Navajo. Deschenie was present at this meeting and interpreted these statements as indicating an intent to eliminate the bilingual education program. There is evidence to the contrary. This court assumes the letter was delivered for purposes of this review. the alleged deficiencies. CCSD was not complying with the state bilingual program requirements of forty five minutes of daily home language instruction. Deschenie also spoke at this meeting and repeated her concerns that the program was not complying with state standards and was not adequately supported within CCSD.
OPINION/ORDER
Is whether the Eleventh Amendment bars suit in federal court against a state official where what is at issue is that * The Honorable Arthur L. Will affirm in part and reverse in part the orders of the District Court. Any person having an interest which is or may be adversely affected may commence a civil action on his own behalf to compel compliance with this chapter (1) against the United States or any other governmental instrumentality or agency to the extent permitted by the eleventh amendment to the Constitution which is alleged to be in violation of the provisions of this chapter or of any rule. Or against any other person who is alleged to be in violation of any rule. Or (2) against the Secretary or the appropriate State regulatory authority to the extent permitted by the eleventh amendment to 3 was also invoked under 28 U.S.C. Defendants in this action for declaratory and injunctive relief are James M. ARIPPA were permitted to intervene as defendants. Seif is the sole named defendant in Counts One through Eight of the eleven count complaint.
Benson were on the brief for amicus curiae National Mining
Association.
Before: Silberman. Was interpreted by
MMS in the payment order to allow that higher rate to
fluctuate from month to month and to authorize the assess
ment of compound interest (i.e.. The
district court concluded the regulation was ultra vires insofar
as it established the higher rate. Are most sensibly interpreted to preclude
that practice as well.
I.
A.
Under the Mineral Lands Leasing Act of 1920 (MLLA) and
other statutes. Of which
50% is disbursed to the state in which the land is located (90%
in the case of Alaska). 30 U.S.C. 191 (1994). The entirety is then conveyed to
the Indians. The size of the royalty
payments is determined by statutory formulae. If
the dispute is resolved favorably to MMS after the due date. The lessee will be late on
part of its royalty payment obligation to fully compensate
MMS and the states or Indians.
OPINION/ORDER
This opinion is being filed by the remaining judges of the panel pursuant to 8th Cir. The agency would reassign the land
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs were Lois J. Benson were on the brief for amicus curiae National Mining Association. Was interpreted by MMS in the payment order to allow that higher rate to fluctuate from month to month and to authorize the assess ment of compound interest (i.e. The district court concluded the regulation was ultra vires insofar as it established the higher rate. Are most sensibly interpreted to preclude that practice as well. Of which 50% is disbursed to the state in which the land is located (90% in the case of Alaska). 30 U.S.C. s 191 (1994). The entirety is then conveyed to the Indians. The size of the royalty payments is determined by statutory formulae. If the dispute is resolved favorably to MMS after the due date. The lessee will be late on part of its royalty payment obligation to fully compensate MMS and the states or Indians. The lessee would have to remit the late portion plus interest on that amount. If the lessee were to pay the full amount demand ed by the agency prior to appeal and subsequently win the appeal (hence making an overpayment).
OPINION/ORDER
Jogi is an Indian citizen who was charged with aggravated battery with a firearm in Champaign County. He was removed from the United States and returned to India. Nor is there any hint that the Champaign County law enforcement officials ever contacted the Indian consulate on their own initiative on Jogi's behalf. At some point after Jogi was in prison. The only one that is pertinent for our purposes is his present case. It concluded that Jogi's allegations were insufficient to trigger subject matter jurisdiction under the ATS. Which was not available at the time the district court ruled. He was charged in Champaign County. Jogi's mother were present. That Jogi was Indian. He was released after serving six years. At no time was Jogi ever informed of his right to contact the Indian consulate. He attached an affidavit asserting that he 4 No. 01 1657 was unaware of his Vienna Convention rights and that he would have contacted the Indian consulate to avail himself of its assistance with the Champaign County prosecution had he been informed of his right to do so.
OPINION/ORDER the Wind River is joined by the Little Wind River and the Popo Agie River. The river is called the Big Horn River. Although the river is not a property boundary. The Wind River is a braided stream which flows through multiple channels within a broad flood plain. The river's main flow was contained in a
OPINION/ORDER
Was employed by the Oglala Sioux Tribe Ambulance Service (the Ambulance Service). Pourier were on the job when the accident occurred. Holding that Pourier's sole remedy was under the Federal Employees Compensation Act (FECA or the Act). The FECA is a workers' compensation statute for federal employees. The Fourth Circuit held the claim was not barred by the FECA because the claim was really directed against the vaccine manufacturer. Pourier contends his claim is against the United States only as a substitute defendant for private third parties Martinez. Under the facts of this case the Ambulance Service and the Tribe were part of the federal government. Martinez was a federal employee. Insofar as Pourier is bringing this FTCA lawsuit against the Ambulance Service and the Tribe. Pourier's claim is directly against the United States and plainly barred by 5 U.S.C. § 8116(c). Insofar as Pourier 2 is bringing suit against Martinez. Wallace is not inconsistent with our analysis.
OPINION/ORDER
Dobbs are beneficiaries of a group health insurance policy sold and underwritten by Anthem and purchased through Mr. Arguing that their state law claims against Anthem are not preempted by federal law. II. DISCUSSION Whether federal law preempts the Dobbses' state law claims is a question of law. The threshold question in this case is whether federal or state law applies to an employee benefit plan established and maintained by a tribe for the benefit of its employees. The next question is whether it preempts the state law causes of action in this case. 29 U.S.C. 1144(a) (specifying that ERISA provisions
OPINION/ORDER
With them on the briefs was William Perry Pendley. With him on the briefs were Michael L. With him on the brief was Ellen J. Robert Wiygul were on the brief of intervenors Grand Canyon Trust. I The history of regulation of aircraft overflights at Grand Canyon National Park is set out in Grand Canyon Air Tour Coalition v. Section 3 of the Act declared that
OPINION/ORDER
Jurisdiction is proper on appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. United States District Judge for the District of South Dakota. 2 2 is presented in the light most favorable to the government. Defendant was approximately twenty one years old. Defendant was unemployed and watched the two children while Bear Heels worked full time. Defendant did not routinely have friends over to the house. There were no unfamiliar men or unfamiliar cars ever seen at the house. Relatives began noticing visible 3
OPINION/ORDER
2004 order. (1) This order and judgment is not binding precedent. The homestead deed to Miller Bruner stated that the grant was
OPINION/ORDER
Asserting that she was immune from suit as an arm of a state sovereign under the Eleventh Amendment to the federal Constitution. As the new provisions are largely inapplicable to this case. BACKGROUND The relevant facts of this case are straightforward and not in dispute. Jugobanka and Beogradska Banka (collectively Banks or foreign banks) are two banks of the former Yugoslavia. Treasury Department closed the foreign banks' offices and arranged to have their liquid assets frozen in several private New York banks. Were stored in warehouses in New York. decade. At least $100 million of the Banks' cash was seized. These funds have been frozen since 1992 by Executive order and controlled by the U.S. Permission for the seizure was obtained from the According to appellant. We have said that the purpose of § 304 is to allow foreign bankruptcy administrators
OPINION/ORDER
Argue that Oklahoma's statutory scheme for specialty motor vehicle license plates is unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. The Motorists contend that Oklahoma's laws unlawfully discriminate against their views by permitting drivers to obtain license plates bearing the messages
OPINION/ORDER
Alleging that the evidence produced at trial was insufficient and that the victim recanted her testimony. Kermit Miner was indicted on two counts of abusive sexual contact and one count of sexual abuse of a minor. Miner was sentenced to twenty four months of incarceration. Kermit Miner was thirty two years old and had a sixth grade education. Went to Standing Rock Sioux Tribal Social Services Department and reported her suspicions that Kermit Miner was abusing the children in his home. Who was fourteen at the time. S.J. was subsequently removed from the household and her mother. Was allowed supervised visits. S.J. testified that both instances of sexual abuse occurred when Audrey Miner was absent. She testified that during this time she was crying and she tried to push him away. Told S.J. that her breasts were soft. S.J. told him to stop touching her and that it was her body. Miner was touching S.J.'s side. Miner was
McAlpine is a restricted Osage Indian and a member of the Native American Church. He was incarcerated at the Federal Prison Camp in El Reno. The denial of which is the subject of the present appeal. McAlpine completed his term of incarceration and was released from El Reno Prison Camp. The Warden now claims that McAlpine's claims have been mooted.
OPINION/ORDER
The district court granted Belgarde's motion to dismiss on the ground that the Montana Department of Family Services is not a
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the brief was J. Of Counsel was Nicole M. With her on the brief was Lara C. Inc. appeals the dismissal of its appeal of the decision of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (
OPINION/ORDER
Misappropriated and spent for improper purposes over $10 million in funds set aside by federal statute to compensate the Tribes for the taking of their land (ERF funds) which were to be used only in accordance with a plan approved by the
OPINION/ORDER
Lorry Van Chase and Bobby LaVallie were each convicted after a jury trial of kidnapping. They were each sentenced by the district court1 to 130 months. Van Chase asserts in addition that the charges against him should be dismissed for lack of a speedy trial and that his sentence should not have been enhanced for a leadership role. Van Chase and LaVallie are enrolled members of the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians. As is Jerelyn LaFountain. Each was carrying a gun. Van Chase told LaVallie to check if anyone else was in the house and then demanded that LaFountain leave with them. Van Chase told her to
Denial of a temporary restraining order is not appealable.
OPINION/ORDER
Baarda argued the cause for petitioners.
OPINION/ORDER
Among the thirteen defendants there were sixteen counts and over fifty charged offenses. Was designed to fund the construction of private homes for low income Native Americans. That federal money was to be supplemented by land donations from the Tribe. The application was eventually approved. Other evidence presented at trial suggested that the funds would have come from the Tribe itself. Only about fifty homes were built. All of the HUD money was spent. The process was plagued with difficulty and controversy. Blaze's application was deficient. Was successful only because it was muscled through by a HUD supervisor. Was in cahoots with Blaze. Lewis was removed from supervision of the program. The situation was reported to the Office of the Inspector General. Although the money on these projects was typically distributed only as reimbursement. The Tribe sought money to pay for land that it had promised to donate. 2 There was ongoing adjustment to the amount of funding and the number of units to be built. 6387 The housing lottery used to distribute the homes was attacked as
OPINION/ORDER
Among the thirteen defendants there were sixteen counts and over fifty charged offenses. Was designed to fund the construction of private homes for low income Native Americans. That federal money was to be supplemented by land donations from the Tribe. The application was eventually approved. Other evidence presented at trial suggested that the funds would have come from the Tribe itself. Only about fifty homes were built. All of the HUD money was spent. The process was plagued with difficulty and controversy. Blaze's application was deficient. Was successful only because it was muscled through by a HUD supervisor. Was in cahoots with Blaze. Lewis was removed from supervision of the program. The situation was reported to the Office of the Inspector General. Although the money on these projects was typically distributed only as reimbursement. The Tribe sought money to pay for land that it had promised to donate. 2 There was ongoing adjustment to the amount of funding and the number of units to be built. 6387 The housing lottery used to distribute the homes was attacked as
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs was Nels J. With her on the brief were Ellen D. With them on the joint brief were Richard A. CART challenges only the authorization of interim trail use.1 It contends that the Board was required to assess the environmental impacts of trail use and erred in not disallowing trail use because the right of way is contami nated. Because CART fails to show that these determinations were contrary to law or unreasonable. We deny the petition. 1 Because CART is challenging only the Board's issuance of a certificate of interim trail use. I. This case is before the court following the Surface Trans portation Board's decision on remand from this court in State of Idaho By and Through Idaho Pub. The Board concluded that if salvage is conducted according to the plans worked out by the railroad and other federal agencies. If four new environ mental mitigation conditions were implemented. Then the railroad's salvage proposal would not have significant adverse environmental impacts. The Board took the position that questions relating to how and whether the right of way should be used as a trail were not questions for the Board to decide.
OPINION/ORDER
Is ordered recalled. 10081 The Opinion filed June 18. Is amended as follows: 1.
OPINION/ORDER
Is ordered recalled. 10081 The Opinion filed June 18. Is amended as follows: 1.
OPINION/ORDER
Because some 7667 of these offenses are punishable by the federal government only when they occur on Indian Reservations or other federal enclaves. The MCA's incorporation of state law to define and punish crimes means simply that federal courts must look to state law to determine the elements of and the sentencing schemes applicable to crimes that are not defined federally. Pluff was charged in Coeur d'Alene Tribal Court with misdemeanor burglary and damaging and destroying property. Although it is not clear from the record whether Pluff is a member of the Coeur d'Alene Tribe. Was sentenced to five days in jail. Pluff was charged with burglary in federal district court. Because there is no federal definition of burglary. Pluff was prosecuted and punished in accordance with the provisions of Idaho law. Pluff argued that because federal courts must apply state law to determine how a crime is defined and punished. Because Idaho law will not allow a defendant to be prosecuted twice for the same crime. His prosecution was barred by the terms of the Major Crimes Act.
OPINION/ORDER
Because some 7667 of these offenses are punishable by the federal government only when they occur on Indian Reservations or other federal enclaves. The MCA's incorporation of state law to define and punish crimes means simply that federal courts must look to state law to determine the elements of and the sentencing schemes applicable to crimes that are not defined federally. Pluff was charged in Coeur d'Alene Tribal Court with misdemeanor burglary and damaging and destroying property. Although it is not clear from the record whether Pluff is a member of the Coeur d'Alene Tribe. Was sentenced to five days in jail. Pluff was charged with burglary in federal district court. Because there is no federal definition of burglary. Pluff was prosecuted and punished in accordance with the provisions of Idaho law. Pluff argued that because federal courts must apply state law to determine how a crime is defined and punished. Because Idaho law will not allow a defendant to be prosecuted twice for the same crime. His prosecution was barred by the terms of the Major Crimes Act.
The central issue raised in this interlocutory appeal is whether Alabama's Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity bars this suit in federal court against the Governor. Because Appellants have no enforcement authority over those specific provisions. Remand this case with instructions to the district court to dismiss Appellees' challenge to the private civil enforcement provision of the partial birth abortion statute.
I.
Appellees are three corporations that own abortion clinics. If he is married to the woman who underwent the abortion. If the woman is a minor at the time of the procedure. Where the abortion
The central issue raised in this interlocutory appeal is whether Alabama's Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity bars this suit in federal court against the Governor. Because Appellants have no enforcement authority over those specific provisions. Remand this case with instructions to the district court to dismiss Appellees' challenge to the private civil enforcement provision of the partial birth abortion statute.
I.
Appellees are three corporations that own abortion clinics. If he is married to the woman who underwent the abortion. If the woman is a minor at the time of the procedure. Where the abortion
OPINION/ORDER
As to that claim we must decide whether Congress' attempt in 11 U.S.C. § 106(a) to abrogate states' Eleventh Amendment immunity is valid. We believe that it is not. Count one sought a determination that Thomas Crow's outstanding student loan obligations to these two state agencies were dischargeable. Asserting that the 2 adversary proceeding was barred by their Eleventh Amendment immunity. The motion was denied. The denial was affirmed by the Sixth Circuit. 319 F.3d 755. The Court reasoned that a court's jurisdiction over a discharge of debt in bankruptcy is derived from its jurisdiction over the debtor's property. Hood is all we need to know in order to resolve the issue involving the denial of the motion to dismiss count one in this case. The Eleventh Amendment is not implicated. The bankruptcy court's jurisdiction over it is premised on the persona of the state. Because jurisdiction is in personam. Eleventh Amendment concerns are not 4 obviated by Hood. We must determine whether Congress' attempt in 11 U.S.C. § 106(a) to abrogate Eleventh Amendment immunity in proceedings brought pursuant to § 362 is constitutional.
OPINION/ORDER
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appellants alleged that their employment with the Cherokee Indian Tribal Casino was terminated because they are nonIndians and that such racial discrimination violated federal and state law. Because we agree with the district court's conclusion that the tribal entities are immune from such a suit. An Indian tribe is specifically excluded from the definition of
OPINION/ORDER
Defendant Appellant Matthew Sean Spry (
OPINION/ORDER
Was convicted in the district court1 of two counts of third degree burglary on an Indian reservation. L.Z. was adjudged a delinquent child and sentenced to confinement in a juvenile facility until he turned twenty one years of age. Because L.Z. was an enrolled member of the tribe. The South Dakota state conviction was invalid. L.Z. was accordingly released from state custody on April 23. L.Z. argues on appeal that his prosecution in federal court is prohibited by the Double Jeopardy Clause because he had been previously prosecuted for the same conduct in state court. disagree. We L.Z. entered a guilty plea conditioned on his right to bring this appeal and was 3 Dual prosecutions by dual sovereigns for the same conduct does not usually constitute double jeopardy.
Argued for defendant appellee.With her on the brief were David M. Kinsella.Of counsel on the brief was Captain Andrew M. Virginia.Of counsel was Virginia G. What must a plaintiff establish regarding the existence of a money mandating law source in order for the Court of Federal Claims to have subject matter jurisdiction over the case under the Tucker Act?Second. What are the consequences of a failure to prove the elements of the cause of action. Even assuming the cause of action is otherwise established. Are there issues that. Are nonjusticiable?
OPINION/ORDER
Is corrected as follows: 1. Were on brief. Was on brief. Which is not a subterfuge to evade [ADEA's] purposes.
OPINION/ORDER
Galeota and Jan Amundson were on brief. Were on brief. A damage 1 A
Defendant Cesspooch is an enrolled member of the Ute Indian Tribe and. 1151.
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the brief was Michael E. With him on the brief were Daniel Meron. The dispute we address today arose from one of many instances in which Churchill's call to collaboration was heeded: the construction of the United States Navy Support Facility Diego Garcia in the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT). Is located in BIOT. The British have controlled these islands since 1814. Appellants Chagos Refugee Group and Chagos Social Committee are non profit associations that work to further the welfare of the Chagossians. Chagossians who traveled outside the archipelago were not allowed to return. Residents were threatened with death if they did not leave. All the cats and dogs on Diego Garcia were slaughtered. The remaining inhabitants of Diego Garcia were forced onto ships and sent to other islands in the archipelago. The entire population of the archipelago was removed two years later. Alexis claims the Chagossians were not fed during the six day sea voyage in harsh conditions. She states that her mother was pregnant at the time of the journey but miscarried the day after arriving in Seychelles.
OPINION/ORDER
Fletcher was drawn to replace him. I. The BIA's factual determinations are reviewed under the substantial evidence standard. We may reverse if the evidence is such that a reasonable factfinder would be compelled to conclude that a well founded fear of persecution has been established. Lal was a prominent member of the Fijian Labor Party. The Labor Party was successful in its 1987 electoral bid. Which was controlled by members of the native Fijian population. Lal was dragged from his 1 The application for asylum is based on Mr. Since the applications of both his wife and child are derivative of his claim. We will focus on Mr. He was placed in detention and held for three days by the army. Explaining that his treatment was in retaliation for his work on behalf of the Labor Party. Lal was stripped of his clothes. Urine was forced into his mouth. He was cut with knives and singed with burning cigarettes. He was deprived of food and water. Lal was in jail. Sometime after he was released from detention. Lal was forced to watch the assault at gunpoint.
OPINION/ORDER
Fletcher was drawn to replace him. I. The BIA's factual determinations are reviewed under the substantial evidence standard. We may reverse if the evidence is such that a reasonable factfinder would be compelled to conclude that a well founded fear of persecution has been established. Lal was a prominent member of the Fijian Labor Party. The Labor Party was successful in its 1987 electoral bid. Which was controlled by members of the native Fijian population. Lal was dragged from his 1 The application for asylum is based on Mr. Since the applications of both his wife and child are derivative of his claim. We will focus on Mr. He was placed in detention and held for three days by the army. Explaining that his treatment was in retaliation for his work on behalf of the Labor Party. Lal was stripped of his clothes. Urine was forced into his mouth. He was cut with knives and singed with burning cigarettes. He was deprived of food and water. Lal was in jail. Sometime after he was released from detention. Lal was forced to watch the assault at gunpoint.
OPINION/ORDER
Fletcher was drawn to replace him. ORDER The Government's petition for rehearing is granted to the extent set forth following. Add a footnote at p. 8391 at the end of the last sentence before section
OPINION/ORDER
Fletcher was drawn to replace him. ORDER The Government's petition for rehearing is granted to the extent set forth following. Add a footnote at p. 8391 at the end of the last sentence before section
OPINION/ORDER
I. Appellant Jaye Clearwater is a member of the Onondaga Nation of Indigenous Peoples. She was employed as a teacher at Sawtooth Elementary School in Cook County. It is undisputed that Clearwater was a competent and effective educator and that she had no disciplinary infractions in her personnel file until the 1992 93 school year. Clearwater began to arrive at school after 8:00 a.m. and was cited by Sawtooth principal Gail Becker for her tardiness. The collective bargaining agreement between the teachers union and the school district provided that
OPINION/ORDER
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm. I The CNMI is a commonwealth government comprised of sixteen islands in the West Pacific.1 Through a Covenant agreement with the United States. The CNMI is under the sovereignty of the United States but retains the
OPINION/ORDER
The appeal was not submitted as NRG Energy. Which was in bankruptcy proceedings. Argued the case for the appellant and was on the briefs. Were also on the briefs. Argued the case for the appellees and was on the joint briefs of the appellees. Hixson were also on the joint briefs as attorneys for the same parties. Were on the joint briefs of the appellees. Were on the joint briefs of the appellees. Were on the joint briefs of the appellees. Were on the joint briefs of the appellees. Were on the brief of amici curiae State of Washington and State of Oregon in support of plaintiff. 2004 is hereby amended as follows: At page 8863 of the slip opinion. Delete the parenthetical quotation and add the following two sentences at the conclusion of footnote 17 as follows: At issue are not state regulatory schemes for employment discrimination. Which might indirectly and unintentionally have some possible effect on energy prices. The petition for rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are DENIED. Circuit Judge: We must decide whether federal removal jurisdiction lies over California state court actions alleging that several power companies fraudulently failed to deliver reserve energy that might otherwise have helped to avert the state's energy crises of 2000 and 2001.
OPINION/ORDER
The appeal was not submitted as NRG Energy. Which was in bankruptcy proceedings. Argued the case for the appellant and was on the briefs. Were also on the briefs. Argued the case for the appellees and was on the joint briefs of the appellees. Hixson were also on the joint briefs as attorneys for the same parties. Were on the joint briefs of the appellees. Were on the joint briefs of the appellees. Were on the joint PEOPLE OF CALIFORNIA v. Were on the joint briefs of the appellees. Were on the brief of amici curiae State of Washington and State of Oregon in support of plaintiff. Circuit Judge: We must decide whether federal removal jurisdiction lies over California state court actions alleging that several power companies fraudulently failed to deliver reserve energy that might otherwise have helped to avert the state's energy crises of 2000 and 2001. Perhaps the culmination of this rethinking was California's decision in 1996 to initiate an aggressive market experiment to deregulate and to restructure its electricity markets.
OPINION/ORDER
Many individual landowners have spent the past twentyfive years trying to determine rights to water in Oregon's Klamath Basin. The federal courts were the first forum for this effort. The United States and the Klamath Tribes have returned to federal court asking the district court to clarify the scope of the federal water rights involved and to assess the propriety of the water rights standard recently announced in a preliminary administrative assessment issued in the Oregon UNITED STATES v. Because the federal dispute presented here is not ripe for our determination. After announcing the standard for prioritizing how the water is applied to fulfill these rights. We are informed that more than 5. 000 claims in all were received and require processing. The ODOJ provided the Water Department with a letter concluding that the Tribes
OPINION/ORDER
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. Christopher Ward appeals from his conviction after a jury trial for attempting to manufacture methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. (1) This order and judgment is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case. Ward's sentence is affirmed in all other respects. Other relevant facts will be provided as needed in our discussion of the issues. The trailer was sixteen feet long and approximately eight feet wide and was located on Indian land in Norman. Four people were inside the trailer: Ward. All four individuals were injured and transported to the hospital. A red rubber hose with brass fittings on each end which were blue in color. Tiger was also indicted for opening and maintaining a place for the purpose of manufacturing methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. 856(a)(1). She was eventually sentenced to eighteen months imprisonment. Ward was sentenced to 327 months imprisonment and ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $11.
OPINION/ORDER
This case boils down to a determination whether the rangers' stop of Becerra Garcia was reasonable. We conclude that it was and thus affirm. BACKGROUND The setting of this case is the Tohono O'odham Indian Reservation. Officers who have less power than fully authorized tribal police officers. The rangers are authorized to patrol the reservation and report suspicious activity to tribal police officers or the United States Border Patrol. Rangers do not have authority to stop suspicious vehicles. Vehicles that stop voluntarily may be detained until the arrival of officials who have authority to arrest. The rangers' primary duties are to patrol. Tribal Rangers Andrew Ruiz and Denver Calabaza were patrolling on a remote dirt road on the reservation when they saw a van heading north. They were about twenty miles from the nearest highway and three miles from the nearest village. Because trespassing is a significant problem and only local ranchers typically use the roads in this vicinity. Which did not have a reservation license plate.
OPINION/ORDER
Goings and Vitalis stated the tribe auditor had become unavailable to testify because his wife was scheduled for medical treatment and he was asserting his Fifth Amendment privilege not to incriminate himself. The district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to appoint an expert because there was not a reasonable probability that an expert would have aided in the defense. Goings argues the district court should have severed her trial from Vitalis's trial because Vitalis gave a pretrial written statement to the government admitting her involvement in taking payroll advances in violation of tribal policy. It does not matter that the confession might have implicated Goings in light of other evidence introduced at trial. Rowland testified she would not have approved payroll advances for Goings and Vitalis if she had known their earlier advances had not been repaid. Vitalis submitted a written offer of proof that Rowland's statement was inaccurate because Exhibit 106 showed she had received an advance of $748.41 on May 29.
OPINION/ORDER
Last line of counsel the following information is added:
OPINION/ORDER
So far as the approval is effective. The territorial boundaries are disputed but. The discharges from the facilities in question are into\ navigable waters of the United States. Or held in trust [for them] . . . shall be\ subject to the jurisdiction of the State of Maine to the extent and\ in the manner provided in the Maine Implementing Act and that Act\ is hereby approved. The legislative\ history noted that
Argued for defendant appellee.With him on the brief were Eileen J. Line height:200%'>The appellants are three Pennsylvania coal companies in the business of mining and selling coal. 26 U.S.C. § 4121 (1994) ( Coal Sales Tax ).The tax was imposed both on coal sold domestically and on coal that was exported
OPINION/ORDER
Published opinion issued 6/24/99 is vacated. This case was originally before the Court on appeal from a grant of summary judgment in favor of Appellees. The Court expressly declined to rule on the issue of whether application of the ADA to state prisons is a constitutional exercise of Congress' legislative power. These claims are no longer before the Court and will not be addressed further. 2 Although the issue of the constitutionality of applying the ADA and Rehabilitation Act to state prisons was not raised below. We exercise our limited discretion to consider the issue on appeal in light of the fact that the constitutionality of this federal statute is purely a question of law. Both parties have fully briefed the issue. Its resolution at this stage will advance and expedite the progress of this litigation. 488 U.S. 880 (1988) (when resolution of issue not presented below will
OPINION/ORDER
Russell Hubbeling and four codefendants were charged with twenty three counts of aggravated sexual abuse of young girls in their extended family in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2241(c). He was sentenced to thirty years in prison. Asserting that he was denied effective assistance of counsel when his attorney (1) failed to make a timely motion or provide adequate foundation under Federal Rule of Evidence 412 for the admission of evidence concerning T.R.'s past sexual activity. We would have denied it. The evidence was clearly sufficient to convict Hubbeling of sexually abusing both nieces. 22 1 The Rule 412 Evidence Claim. One of the victims was Hubbeling's seven year old niece. That some was inadmissible general 3 Rule 412 provides in relevant part: (a) Evidence generally inadmissible. The following evidence is not admissible in any civil or criminal proceeding involving alleged sexual misconduct except as provided in subdivisions (b) and (c): (1) Evidence offered to prove that any alleged victim engaged in other sexual behavior. ***** (b) Exceptions. (1) In a criminal case.
OPINION/ORDER
The petition is therefore denied. The stay of the issuance of the mandate is vacated. No liberties are safe if courts can so easily erase them. No lover of liberty can be confident that an important right will never become so disfavored in popular or elite opinion as to be vulnerable to being discarded like the Second Amendment. KING 4167 I have spelled out in great detail why our court's view of the Second Amendment is indefensible. I will not restate them here. Our court takes what to me is a position verging on droll legal humor. That the right is a
OPINION/ORDER
Is the former Chief Judge of the Spirit Lake Sioux Tribal Court. He was illegally removed from his position as Chief Judge in violation of tribal law. We conclude that dismissal was appropriate. 856 57 (1985) (district court should not assert jurisdiction over case arising out of acts occurring on reservation until tribal court was first given opportunity to determine its jurisdiction to hear case). Here the parties are all Tribe members. 1420 (8th Cir. 1996) (exhaustion of tribal court remedies required where many parties are tribal entities or members. Father seeking custody of children residing on reservation should have exhausted tribal remedies by appealing tribal court's refusal to enforce custody decree).
OPINION/ORDER
1994 is corrected as follows: On page 2. Meyer & Solomon were on brief. Clarifying the source and extent of bankruptcy courts' powers to manage the estates of debtors whose fates are intertwined with the affairs of failed financial institutions. Background Background The facts essential to an understanding of this appeal are not disputed. The debt (much of which remains unpaid) is evidenced by three promissory notes. The notes are cross collateralized and secured by mortgages encumbering all three pieces of property. First Service was declared insolvent. The FDIC was appointed as liquidating agent (and thereby became the owner and holder of the notes). The appeal (which we shall term
OPINION/ORDER
PA 18042 Counsel for Appellees 3 ORDER AMENDING OPINION IT IS ORDERED that the published Opinion in the above case.
OPINION/ORDER
Senior Circuit Judge: This is an appeal from a judgment of juvenile delinquency under the Federal Juvenile Delinquency Act. The primary question for decision is whether the district court should have dismissed the information for violation of the special speedy trial provision of the Delinquency Act. We join our sister circuits that have addressed the question and hold that time begins to run at the commencement of federal detention of the juvenile on the federal delinquency charge. 6018 UNITED STATES v. There was no violation of § 5036 in this case and we accordingly affirm the district court's ruling. That no hearing shall be held for disposition of a juvenile after a finding of delinquency
Defendant was charged with violating the Deadbeat Parents Punishment Act (
OPINION/ORDER
This time there is a twist: rather than appealing his sentence. It was less than clear whether it was necessary or proper to incorporate into indictments and jury instructions the United States Sentencing Guidelines (
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
OPINION/ORDER
Was arbitrary and capricious and contrary to law in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The district court concluded that the 2001 ROD was not arbitrary and capricious or contrary to law. We have jurisdiction on appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The electric power generated by the Federal Columbia River Power System is marketed by the Bonneville Power Administration. The Lower Granite dam are on the lower Snake River1 in Washington state and are the subject of this The lower Snake River spans a 140 mile stretch of the Snake River. Each of these dams was built pursuant to Congressional mandate. For the four dams that are the subject of this lawsuit. No exemption was sought or received in this case. 4 The Washington State Department of Ecology has the authority to promulgate water quality standards to carry out the provisions of Chapter 90 of the Washington Revised Code. Of which certain portions thereof are within the jurisdictional limits of this state. No temperature increase will be allowed which will raise the receiving water temperature by greater than 0.3oC.
OPINION/ORDER
At issue is whether the Comprehensive Environmental Response. We will overrule United States v. I. The material facts are undisputed. The DuPont Newport Superfund Site is an industrial site in Delaware. The site was identified in the early 1980s as a potential threat to human health. It was placed on CERCLA's National Priorities List. The total cost to the government was $1. The District Court held the government's recovery of both
The lawsuit is barred by the Eleventh Amendment. We affirm the district court's judgment.
I.
The factual and procedural history surrounding this case are straightforward. An English only Amendment to the Alabama Constitution was ratified. Amendment 509 states:
English is the official language of the state of Alabama. The legislature and officials of the state of Alabama shall take all steps necessary to insure that the role of English as the common language of the state of Alabama is preserved and enhanced. The legislature shall make no law which diminishes or ignores the role of English as the common language of the state of Alabama.
