Litigation

In collections

(41 - 60 of 80)

Pages

Hotel Employees & Restaurant Employees International Union, petitioner, v. Gray Davis, as Governor, etc., et al., respondents; Frank Lawrence, real party in interest: Eric Cortez et al., petitioners, v. Gray Davis, as Governor, etc., respondent: Frank Law
Title
Hotel Employees & Restaurant Employees International Union, petitioner, v. Gray Davis, as Governor, etc., et al., respondents; Frank Lawrence, real party in interest: Eric Cortez et al., petitioners, v. Gray Davis, as Governor, etc., respondent: Frank Lawrence et al., real parties in interest: nos. S074850, S074851
Summary
Case summary: The Supreme Court of California issued a peremptory writ of mandate prohibiting the Governor and the Secretary of the State of California from implementing Proposition 5, an initiative that would add a section to the government code detailing tribal-state compacts for gaming and gambling in the state. The Court held all but the last sentence of Proposition 5 was invalid because it was inconsistent with the anti-casino provision of California's Constitution.
Year
1999
Type
Litigation
Publisher
West Pub. Co.
Place
St. Paul
In the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit: the Chemehuevi Tribe of Indians, et al., petitioners, v. Federal Power Commission, respondent, Arizona Public Service Company, ... [et al.], intervenors: no. 71-2012
Title
In the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit: the Chemehuevi Tribe of Indians, et al., petitioners, v. Federal Power Commission, respondent, Arizona Public Service Company, ... [et al.], intervenors: no. 71-2012: petitioners' supplemental brief
Summary
Case summary: Federal Power Commission does not have licensing jurisdiction over steam power plants which are located on or near Indian reservations.
Year
1971
Type
Litigation
Publisher
[Native American Rights Fund?]
Place
[Boulder, Colo.?]
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Katie John, et al., plaintiffs-appellees v. United States of America, et al., defendants-appellees, and State of Alaska, and Frank Rue, in his capacity as Commissioner of the Alaska Department of Fish
Title
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Katie John, et al., plaintiffs-appellees v. United States of America, et al., defendants-appellees, and State of Alaska, and Frank Rue, in his capacity as Commissioner of the Alaska Department of Fish & Game, defendants-appellants: appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Alaska (no. A90-484-CV (HRH), consolidated with no. A92-264-CV (HRH): brief of amici curiae, natural resources and Indian law professors in support of private appellees and affirmance
Summary
Addresses issue raised by State of Alaska as to whether the Secretary of the Interior has specific authority to adopt a comprehensive scheme for fish and wildlife management on "public lands" as defined in Section 102 of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA).
Year
2000
Type
Litigation
Publisher
[Fredericks, Pelcyger & Hester?]
Place
[Louisville, Colo.?]
Arnold Davis and Wilbur Davis, appellants, v. Warden, Nevada State Prison, respondent: no. 6745
Title
Arnold Davis and Wilbur Davis, appellants, v. Warden, Nevada State Prison, respondent: no. 6745
Summary
Case summary: State lacked jurisdiction to convict appellants, enrolled members of the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe of Indians, for attempted murder of non-Indian since action occurred within the Pyramid Lake Indian Reservation, which has been excluded from state's jurisdiction.
Year
1972
Type
Litigation
Publisher
West Pub. Co.
Place
St. Paul
In the Supreme Court of the United States: October term, 1970 : no. [blank] : Alex Scholder, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated; Pala Band of Mission Indians and Rincon Band of Mission Indians, individually and on behalf of others sim
Title
In the Supreme Court of the United States: October term, 1970 : no. [blank] : Alex Scholder, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated; Pala Band of Mission Indians and Rincon Band of Mission Indians, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, petitioners, v. United States of America; Department of the Interior; Bureau of Indian Affairs; Stewart L. Udall, Secretary of the Interior; Robert L. Bennett, Commissioner, Bureau of Indian Affairs; William E. Finale, Director, Sacramento Office, Bureau of Indian Affairs; and Jess T. Town, Field Representative, Riverside, California area field office, Bureau of Indian Affairs, respondents: petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Summary
Case summary: Class action suit brought by individual Indians and Indian bands to stop the Secretary of the Interior and the Bureau of Indian Affairs from spending Pala Indian Irrigation Project funds for the benefit of a non-Indian owner of land situated within the Indian irrigation district. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part the United States Court for the District of Southern California's holding regarding spending of Indian irrigation project funds for benefit of non-Indian land owner within the project. The Court of Appeals reaffirmed the expenditure by the Secretary of Interior and Bureau of Indian Affairs was not an unconstitutional taking under applicable federal laws and remanded the Indian's claim as to the validity of reimbursement charges. The United States Supreme Court ruled that use of Indian irrigation project funds for benefit of non-Indian land owner within project was allowable under applicable federal laws.
Year
1970
Type
Litigation
Publisher
[California Indian Legal Services?]
Place
[Berkeley, Calif.?]
In the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: the Agua Caliente Band of Mission Indians, by and through its tribal council, et al., appellants, v. The County of Riverside, a political subdivision of the state of California, appellee: appeal
Title
In the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: the Agua Caliente Band of Mission Indians, by and through its tribal council, et al., appellants, v. The County of Riverside, a political subdivision of the state of California, appellee: appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California: brief of amicus curiae
Summary
Case summary: Possessory interest tax could be imposed on lesses of Indian land absent legislation demonstrating a congressional purpose to forbid imposition of tax.
Year
1970
Type
Litigation
Publisher
California Indian Legal Services
Place
Escondido, Calif.
In the Supreme Court of the United States, October term, 1970, no. 5912: Kathleen Ramos, a minor, by her mother Marcella Mason, as next friend; Marcella Mason, individually, and on behalf of three other minor children residing with her; and Della Morales,
Title
In the Supreme Court of the United States, October term, 1970, no. 5912: Kathleen Ramos, a minor, by her mother Marcella Mason, as next friend; Marcella Mason, individually, and on behalf of three other minor children residing with her; and Della Morales, individually, appellants, vs. John C. Montgomery, individually, and as Director of the Department of Social Welfare of the State of California; and H. E. Detrich, individually, and as Director of the Department of Social Welfare for the County of San Diego, California, appellees: on appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California: jurisdictional statement
Summary
Case summary: Supreme Court affirmed Federal Court's dismissal of a suit to compel State Welfare Department to make AFDC payments to natural parents equal to that given to foster parents.
Year
1970
Type
Litigation
Publisher
California Indian Legal Services
Place
[Berkeley, Calif.?]
In the Supreme Court of the United States, October term, 1975, nos. 75-588, 75-592: State of Washington, et al., petitioners v. United States of America, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, Squaxin Island Tribe of Indians, Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe, Skokomish Indi
Title
In the Supreme Court of the United States, October term, 1975, nos. 75-588, 75-592: State of Washington, et al., petitioners v. United States of America, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, Squaxin Island Tribe of Indians, Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe, Skokomish Indian Tribe, Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians, Quinault Tribe of Indians, Makah Indian Tribe, Lummi Indian Tribe, Quileute Indian Tribe, Hoh Tribe of Indians, Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakima Indian Indian Nation, Upper Skagit River Tribe, Nisqually Indian Community of the Nisqually Reservation, and Puyallup Tribe of the Puyallup Reservation, respondents: and Northwest Steelheaders Council of Trout Unlimited, petitioner, v. United States of America, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, Squaxin Island Tribe of Indians, Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe, Skokomish Indian Tribe, Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians, Quinault Tribe of Indians, Makah Indian Tribe, Lummi Indian Tribe, Quileute Indian Tribe, Hoh Tribe of Indians, Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakima Indian Indian Nation, Upper Skagit River Tribe, Nisqually Indian Community of the Nisqually Reservation, and Puyallup Tribe of the Puyallup Reservation, respondents: brief of respondent Indian tribes in opposition to petitions for writs of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Summary
Case summary: Tribes are entitled to continued access to traditional off-reservation fishing grounds, one-half total run of fish, and may regulate their members' fishing, while state may regulate Indian fishing rights only if necessary for conservation and if run cannot otherwise be preserved.
Year
1975
Type
Litigation
Publisher
Byron S. Adams Printing
Place
Washington, D.C.
In the Supreme Court of the United States, October term 1997: State of Alaska, petitioner, vs. Native Village of Venetie Tribal government, et al., respondents: on writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Title
In the Supreme Court of the United States, October term 1997: State of Alaska, petitioner, vs. Native Village of Venetie Tribal government, et al., respondents: on writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: brief of amici curiae Indian law professors in support of affirmance
Summary
In 1943, the Secretary of the Interior set aside a 1.8 million acre reservation in Alaska (less than one-half of one percent of the State's land area) to protect the hunting grounds of the Natives of Venetie and Arctic Villages ("Venetie Reservation"). Unlike almost all other Native villages in Alaska, the Natives of Venetie and Arctic Villages elected under section 19(b) of the 1971 Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, 43 U.S.C. Sec. 1601, 1618(b) ("ANCSA") to acquire title to their existing reservation and thereby to forgo any other land or economic benefits under the Act. The question presented is: Whether the Ninth Circuit correctly held, based on the complete absence of language in ANCSA extinguishing Indian country in Alaska, that the Native Village of Venetie Tribal Government (which represents both Venetie and Arctic Village) occupies Indian country and retains its inherent authority to tax business activities occurring within its territory in order to provide essential government services in an area not served by any other local government.
Year
1997
Type
Litigation
Publisher
Cockle Law Brief Printing
Place
[Omaha, Nebraska]
The Oneida Indian Nation of New York State, also known as the Oneida Nation of New York, also known as the Oneida Indians of New York, and the Oneida Indian Nation of Wisconsin, also known as the Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin, Inc., appellants, v.
Title
The Oneida Indian Nation of New York State, also known as the Oneida Nation of New York, also known as the Oneida Indians of New York, and the Oneida Indian Nation of Wisconsin, also known as the Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin, Inc., appellants, v. The County of Oneida, New York, and the County of Madison, New York, appellees: no. 720, docket 72-1029
Summary
Case summary: Action by the Oneida Indian Nations of New York State and Wisconsin challenging sale of tribal lands as violating Indian treaties and the Indian Non-Intercourse Act. The Court of Appeals affirmed dismissal for lack of federal question jurisdiction.
Year
1972
Type
Litigation
Publisher
West Pub. Co.
Place
St. Paul
In the Supreme Court of the United States, October term, 1971, no. 71-834: Rosalind McClanahan, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, appellant, v. Arizona State Tax Commission, appellee
Title
In the Supreme Court of the United States, October term, 1971, no. 71-834: Rosalind McClanahan, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, appellant, v. Arizona State Tax Commission, appellee: brief of the Native American Rights Fund as amicus curiae in support of appellant
Summary
Case Summary: State lacks jurisdiction to impose a tax on the income of Navajo Indians residing within their reservation and earning their income on the reservation.
Year
1971
Type
Litigation
Publisher
Bradford
Place
Denver, Colo.
In the Supreme Court for the State of Alaska: Mobil Oil Corporation, et al, petitioners, vs Local Boundary Commission, et al, and Arctic Slope Native Association, et al, respondent: no. [blank]
Title
In the Supreme Court for the State of Alaska: Mobil Oil Corporation, et al, petitioners, vs Local Boundary Commission, et al, and Arctic Slope Native Association, et al, respondent: no. [blank]: brief of respondents
Summary
Case Summary: Court upheld decision that the incorporation of North Slope Borough was valid and met the geography standard.
Year
1972
Type
Litigation
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit: no. 71-1122: United States of America, appellee, v. 687.30 Acres of Land, more or less, situate in Dakota and Thurston Counties, State of Nebraska, and Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska, appellant: appeal f
Title
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit: no. 71-1122: United States of America, appellee, v. 687.30 Acres of Land, more or less, situate in Dakota and Thurston Counties, State of Nebraska, and Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska, appellant: appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska: appellant's reply brief
Summary
Case summary: Suit by Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska contends that congressional legislation enabling condemnation of tribal land for federal water project failed to manifest requisite intent to abrogate treaty rights. Court holds that orders denying tribe's request for relief were not appealable.
Year
1971
Type
Litigation
United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit: no. [blank] : Sandia Pueblo; San Felipe Pueblo; Santa Ana Pueblo; Santo Domingo Pueblo; Michael Pacheco by Paul Pacheco, his next friend, Ida Naranjo by Marie Naranjo her next friend, and Hazel Guiterrez by Ma
Title
United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit: no. [blank] : Sandia Pueblo; San Felipe Pueblo; Santa Ana Pueblo; Santo Domingo Pueblo; Michael Pacheco by Paul Pacheco, his next friend, Ida Naranjo by Marie Naranjo her next friend, and Hazel Guiterrez by Manuel Guiterrez, her next friend, and Jane Pahona by Angie Pahona, her next friend, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated; Rose Tenorio, Crucita Cate and Christy Velasquez individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, appellants, vs Bernalillo Municipal School District Board of Education; Tom O. Montoya, President of the Board of Education of Bernalillo Municipal School District; Rebecca D. Baca, Vice President of the Board of Education of Bernalillo Municipal School District; Inez M. Gabaldon, Secretary of the Board of Education of Bernalillo Municipal School District; Reuben J. Montoya, a member of the Board of Education of Bernalillo Municipal School District; Romeo A. Ortiz, a member of the Board of Education of Bernalillo Municipal School District; Pete Santisteven, Superintendent of the Bernalillo Municipal School District; State Board of Education of the State of New Mexico; Virgil W. Henry, President of the State Board of Education; Frederick G. Comstock, Vice President of the State Board of Education; Laura E. McKinley, Secretary of the State Board of Education; Albert Amador, L. Grady Mayfield, Jr., H. M. Mortimer, Thelma Inmon, Ed Heringa, C. C. Murphy, and K. I. Langley, members of the Board of Education; Leonard J. De Layo, Superintendent of the Department of Education of the State of New Mexico; Donald L. Harvey, Director of Program Operation for Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Title I funds for the State of New Mexico; Walter J. Hickel, Secretary of the Department of the Interior; Louis M. Bruce, Commissioner of Indian Affairs; Walter O. Olson, Area Director, Albuquerque Area Office, Bureau of Indian Affairs; James E. Allen, United States Commissioner of Education, appellees: plaintiff's docketing statement
Year
1971
Type
Litigation
Publisher
[Native American Rights Fund?]
Place
[Berkeley, Calif.?]
Mobil Oil Corporation et al., appellants, v. Local Boundary Commission of the State of Alaska et al., appellees: no. 1947
Title
Mobil Oil Corporation et al., appellants, v. Local Boundary Commission of the State of Alaska et al., appellees: no. 1947
Summary
Case summary: Court upheld decision that the incorporation of North Slope Borough was valid and met the geography standard.
Year
1974
Type
Litigation
Publisher
West Pub. Co.
Place
St. Paul
In the Supreme Court of the United States: no.70-78: Affiliated Ute Citizens of the State of Utah, et al., petitioners v. United States of America, respondent ; Anita Reyos, et al., petitioners v. First Security Bank of Utah, N.A., United States of Americ
Title
In the Supreme Court of the United States: no.70-78: Affiliated Ute Citizens of the State of Utah, et al., petitioners v. United States of America, respondent ; Anita Reyos, et al., petitioners v. First Security Bank of Utah, N.A., United States of America, et al., respondents: motion for leave to file brief as amicus curiae and brief of the Native American Rights Fund, as amicus curiae
Summary
Case summary: Under the Ute Termination Act, once Secretary of Interior issued proclamation of termination the United States no longer owed any trust duty or responsibility to the mixed blood members of the Ute Tribe.
Year
1970
Type
Litigation
Publisher
Byron S. Adams Press
Place
Washington, D. C.
In the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico: Cochiti Pueblo; Sandia Pueblo; San Felipe Pueblo; Santa Ana Pueblo; Santo Domingo Pueblo; Michael Pacheco by Paul Pacheco, his next friend, Ida Naranjo by Marie Naranjo her next friend, a
Title
In the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico: Cochiti Pueblo; Sandia Pueblo; San Felipe Pueblo; Santa Ana Pueblo; Santo Domingo Pueblo; Michael Pacheco by Paul Pacheco, his next friend, Ida Naranjo by Marie Naranjo her next friend, and Hazel Guiterrez by Manuel Guiterrez, her next friend, and Jane Pahona by Angie Pahona, her next friend, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated; Rose Tenorio, Crucita Cate and Christy Velasquez individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, plaintiffs, vs. Bernalillo Municipal School District Board of Education; Tom O. Montoya, President of the Board of Education of Bernalillo Municipal School District; Rebecca D. Baca, Vice President of the Board of Education of Bernalillo Municipal School District; Inez M. Gabaldon, Secretary of the Board of Education of Bernalillo Municipal School District; Reuben J. Montoya, a member of the Board of Education of Bernalillo Municipal School District; Romeo A. Ortiz, a member of the Board of Education of Bernalillo Municipal School District; Pete Santisteven, Superintendent of the Bernalillo Municipal School District; State Board of Education of the State of New Mexico; Virgil W. Henry, President of the State Board of Education; Frederick G. Comstock, Vice President of the State Board of Education; Laura E. McKinley, Secretary of the State Board of Education; Albert Amador, L. Grady Mayfield, Jr., H. M. Mortimer, Thelma Inmon, Ed Heringa, C. C. Murphy, and K. I. Langley, members of the Board of Education; Leonard J. De Layo, Superintendent of the Department of Education of the State of New Mexico; Harry Wugalter, Director of Finance of the Department of Education of the State of New Mexico; Donald L. Harvey, Director of Program Operation for Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Title I funds for the State of New Mexico; Walter J. Hickel, Secretary of the Department of the Interior; Louis M. Bruce, Commissioner of Indian Affairs; Walter O. Olson, Area Director, Albuquerque Area Office, Bureau of Indian Affairs; James E. Allen, United States Commissioner of Education: defendants
Summary
Complaint: Prohibitory Injunction, Mandatory Injunction, Declaratory Relief, Other Relief (Jury Trial Demanded).
Year
1969
Type
Litigation
Publisher
[Hartley, Olson & Baca?]
Place
[Albuquerque, N.M.]
Mobil Oil Corporation; Amerada Hess Corporation; Amoco Production Company; BP Oil Corporation; Humble Oil & Refining Company; Phillips Petroleum Company; Union Oil Company of California; Frontier Rock & Sand, Inc.; Mukluk Freight Lines, Inc.; Clifford C.
Title
Mobil Oil Corporation; Amerada Hess Corporation; Amoco Production Company; BP Oil Corporation; Humble Oil & Refining Company; Phillips Petroleum Company; Union Oil Company of California; Frontier Rock & Sand, Inc.; Mukluk Freight Lines, Inc.; Clifford C. Burglin; Lock Jacobs; and Frank J. Novosel, appellants, vs. Local Boundary Commission of the State of Alaska; John S. Hedland; Allen Schontz; Christopher Bernsdorff; Gary Ackerman; Donald Van Brocklin; H.A. Boucher, Lieutenant Governor of the State of Alaska; and the State of Alaska; Arctic Slope Native Association; City of Anaktuvuk Pass; City of Barrow; City of Kaktovik; City of Point Hope; City of Wainwright; Joseph Upicksoun; Charles Edwardson, Jr.; and North Slope Borough, appellees: brief of appellees
Summary
Case Summary: Court upheld decision that the incorporation of North Slope Borough was valid and met the geography standard. File No. 1947. Filed July 17, 1973, in the Supreme Court of the State of Alaska.
Year
1973
Type
Litigation
Place
[Anchorage, Alaska?]
In the Supreme Court of the United States, October term, 1972, nos. 72-746 and 72-481: the Puyallup Tribe, petitioner, v. the Department of Game of the State of Washington, respondent: the Department of Game of the State of Washington, petitioner v. the P
Title
In the Supreme Court of the United States, October term, 1972, nos. 72-746 and 72-481: the Puyallup Tribe, petitioner, v. the Department of Game of the State of Washington, respondent: the Department of Game of the State of Washington, petitioner v. the Puyallup Tribe, respondent: on writs of certiorari to the Supreme Court of the State of Washington: motion for leave to file brief amici curiae and brief of amici curiae: Ramona C. Bennett, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, Squaxin Island Tribe of Indians, Nisqually Indian Community, Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe
Summary
Case summary: Action for judgment defining treaty fishing rights of Indian tribe.
Year
1973
Type
Litigation
Publisher
Byron S. Adams Printing
Place
Washington, D.C.
In the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: no. 24156 : United States of America, appellee, vs. Alpine Land & Reservoir Company, et al., appellees, Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe, appellent-applicant for intervention: appeal from the United St
Title
In the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: no. 24156 : United States of America, appellee, vs. Alpine Land & Reservoir Company, et al., appellees, Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe, appellent-applicant for intervention: appeal from the United States District Court for the District Court of Nevada: appellant's petition for rehearing
Summary
Case summary: Court denies tribe's motion to intervene in action by the government to quiet title to rights to water for a federal reclamation project, and court later holds that water rights of federal reclamation project are not limited by virtue of state law or contracts between Secretary of Interior and project water users.
Year
1970
Type
Litigation

Pages