Subjects: United States. Bureau of Indian Affairs -- Officials and employees; School accidents; Negligence; Belcourt Public School District (N.D.).
*Synopsis: Teacher, who was injured when she attempted to break up fight between students in lunchroom, brought negligence action against school district. The District Court, Rolette County, Northeast Judicial District, Lester Ketterling, J., granted summary judgment to school district, and teacher appealed.
*Holding: The Supreme Court, Neumann, J., held that school district did not owe a duty of care to teacher who was employed by the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) as a special education teacher at the school and who was injured when she attempted to break up fight between students in lunchroom. Affirmed.
Subjects: Parent and child (Law); Trials (Custody of children) -- North Dakota; Indian children -- Legal status, laws, etc.; Child welfare; United States. Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978; Evidence (Law).
*Synopsis: A petition was filed to terminate mother and father's parental rights to their two children. The Juvenile Court, Traill County, East Central Judicial District, Janice Benson Johnson, Referee, terminated parental rights. Father appealed.
*Holding:
The Supreme Court, Maring, J., held that:
(1) clear and convincing evidence supported finding that children were deprived;
(2) clear and convincing evidence supported finding that the deprivation of
the children was likely to continue;
(3) clear and convincing evidence supported finding that father's custody
of the children was likely to result in serious emotional or physical harm
to the children; and
(4) clear and convincing evidence supported finding that efforts were made
to preserve the Indian family. Affirmed. Dale V. Sandstrom, J., filed a specially
concurring opinion in which Carol Ronning Kapsner, J., joined.
William A. Neumann, J., concurred specially.
Subjects: Parent and child (Law); Trials (Custody of children) -- Montana; Indian children -- Legal status, laws, etc.; Child welfare; United States. Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978; Evidence (Law).
*Synopsis: Department of Public Health and Human Services (DPHHS) commenced child abuse and neglect proceedings. The District Court, Eighth Judicial District, Cascade County, Thomas McKittrick, J., terminated mother's parental rights. Mother appealed.
*Holding: The Supreme Court, James C. Nelson, J., held that: (1) trial court applied correct standard of proof under Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), and (2) evidence supported trial court's determination that child was likely to suffer serious physical or emotional damage if placed in mother's care. Affirmed.
Subjects: Parent and child (Law); Trials (Custody of children) -- California; Indian children -- Legal status, laws, etc.; Child welfare; United States. Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978; Fresno County (Calif.).
*Synopsis:
Father's parental rights to five children were terminated in the Superior
Court, Fresno County,
Martin Suits, J. Father appealed.
*Holding: The Court of Appeal, Buckley, J., held that: (1) father did not forfeit issue of county department's compliance with federal Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), and (2) department failed to comply with ICWA notice requirements. Reversed and remanded.
Subjects: Parent and child (Law); Trials (Custody of children) -- California; Indian children -- Legal status, laws, etc.; Child welfare; United States. Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978.
*Synopsis: Father's parental rights to five children were terminated in the Superior Court, Fresno County, No. 01CEJ300310, Martin Suits, J. Father appealed.
*Holding:
The Court of Appeal, Buckley, J., held that:
(1) father did not forfeit issue of county department's compliance with federal
Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), and
(2) department failed to comply with ICWA notice requirements.
Reversed and remanded.
Subjects: Utah; Native American Church of North America -- Members; Peyote; Peyotism; Non-members of a tribe; Utah. Controlled Substances Act.
*Synopsis: State brought criminal action against branch of Native American Church and members of Church branch, charging defendants with multiple felony counts of engaging in continuing criminal enterprise and engaging in pattern of unlawful activity by possessing and distributing peyote, a controlled substance, to members and visitors during religious services, and State also sought forfeiture of Church branch property. The Fourth District Court, Provo Department, Gary D. Stott, J., denied defendants' motion to dismiss. Defendants appealed.
*Holding: The Supreme Court, Parrish, J., held that: (1) the federal exemption for religious use of peyote in bona fide ceremonies of Native American Church constitutes a specific exception to listing of peyote as controlled substance under Utah Controlled Substances Act, and (2) the exemption applies to Church members who are not members of a federally-recognized tribe. Reversed and remanded.
Subjects: Pinoleville Rancheria of Pomo Indians of California; Trusts and trustees; Trust lands -- California.
*Synopsis: (from the opinion) After more than a century of court supervision, the trial court ordered dissolution of the "Trusteeship of the Pinoleville Indians" (Trust), along with distribution of all Trust assets. The primary asset is a 59-acre parcel of property near Ukiah, Mendocino County. It is adjacent to the Pinoleville Rancheria (Rancheria), an approximately 100-acre parcel acquired by the federal government for the federally recognized Pinoleville Band of Pomo Indians (Pinoleville Band).
*Holding:not available
Subjects: Parent and child (Law); Trials (Custody of children) -- Iowa; Substance abuse; Indian children -- Legal status, laws, etc.; Child welfare; United States. Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978.
*Synopsis: Mother appealed from decision of the District Court, Polk County, Karla Fultz, Associate Juvenile Judge, terminating her parental rights.
*Holding:The Court of Appeals, Mahan, P.J., held that it was in the children's best interests to terminate mother's parental rights. Affirmed.
Subjects: Cherokee Nation Enterprises (Okla.); Workers' compensation -- Oklahoma; Jurisdiction -- Oklahoma.
*Synopsis: Workers' compensation claimant sought review of an order of the Workers' Compensation Court, D. Craig Johnston, J., that found that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over claimant's benefits claim.
*Holding: The Court of Civil Appeals, Rapp, J., held that employer's workers' compensation
insurance company was estopped from denying workers' compensation coverage.
Reversed and remanded with instructions.
Subjects: Parent and child (Law); Trials (Custody of children) -- California; San Diego County (Calif.). Health and Human Services Agency; Indian children -- Legal status, laws, etc.; Child welfare; United States. Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978.
*Synopsis: The Superior Court of San Diego County, No. J511730F, Susan D. Huguenor, J., entered order terminating parental rights to child with possible Indian heritage. Father appealed.
*Holding: The Court of Appeal, McDonald, J., held that notice under Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) was insufficient as it contained no information about father' grandmother or child's paternal grandmother. Reversed with directions.
Subjects: Drunk driving -- Off Indian reservations; Jurisdiction -- Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community of the Salt River Reservation, Arizona; Indian reseration police -- Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community of the Salt River Reservation, Arizona; Arizona.
*Synopsis: Defendant was convicted in the Superior Court, Maricopa County, Cause No. CR 2003-030770-001-SE, John M. Gaylord, J., of aggravated driving while under the influence, following denial of her motion to suppress. Defendant appealed.
*Holding: The Court of Appeals, Portley, J., held that law enforcement officer who was employed by governing body of Indian tribe and certified by Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board (AZ POST) was expressly authorized by statute to conduct brief stop and detention of vehicle off the reservation. Affirmed.
Subjects: Mattaponi Indian Reservation (Virginia) -- Exclusion, Right of; Trials (Trespass); Evidence.
*Synopsis: Defendant was convicted in the Circuit Court, King William County, Thomas B. Hoover, J., of trespassing, and he appealed.
*Holding: The Court of Appeals, Humphreys, J., held that evidence was sufficient to establish that defendant was forbidden from entering Indian reservation by those lawfully in charge thereof so as to support defendant's conviction for trespassing. Affirmed.
Subjects: Crimes without victims; Criminal jurisdiction -- Kansas; Criminal actions arising in Indian Country (Kan.).
*Synopsis: Lincoln C. Brown appeals the denial of his motion, alleging that the State lacked jurisdiction over a victimless crime perpetrated by a Native American on a tribal reservation. The district judge reviewed the criminal file and proceedings and summarily denied the motion.
*Holding: not available
Subjects: United States. Indian Gaming Regulatory Act; Intergovernmental agreements -- Wisconsin; Intergovernmental agreements -- Forest County Potawatomi Community of Wisconsin Potawatomie Indians, Wisconsin; Gambling on Indian reservations; Indian gaming; Wisconsin. Governor.
*Synopsis: State Senate Majority Leader, State Assembly Speaker, and Joint Committee on Legislative Organization filed original action for declaratory and injunctive relief against Governor and Secretary of Administration, regarding Governor's agreement to amendments to State's gaming compact with Indian tribe under federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA).
*Holding: The Supreme Court, David T. Prosser, J., held that: (1) State statute allowing Governor to enter into compacts with Indian tribes pursuant to IGRA was not an unconstitutional delegation of power; but (2) Governor lacked inherent or delegated authority, under separation of powers principles, to give up State's power, under pre-amendment compact, to periodically withdraw from compact; (3) Governor lacked inherent or delegated authority to allow tribe to offer new casino-style games that were, as reflected in State's criminal statutes and reinforced by its Constitution, prohibited to everyone in the State; and (4) Governor lacked inherent or delegated authority to waive State's sovereign immunity. Declaratory relief granted; injunctive relief denied. Shirley S. Abrahamson, C.J., and Ann Walsh Bradley, J., and N. Patrick Crooks, JJ., jointly filed a dissenting opinion.
Subjects: Workers' compensation; Tunica-Biloxi Indian Tribe of Louisiana -- Employees; Gambling on Indian reservations; Indian gaming; Paragon Casino Resort (La.); Jurisdiction -- Louisiana; Louisiana. Office of Worker's Compensation Administration.
*Synopsis: Casino employee filed workers' compensation claim against Native American tribe that owned casino. The Office of Workers' Compensation--District 2, Parish of Rapides, James L. Braddock, Workers' Compensation Judge (WCJ), granted tribe's exception of lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and employee appealed.
*Holding: The Court of Appeal, Decuir, J., held that:(1) tribe did not waive its sovereign immunity with respect to workers' compensation claim filed in state Workers' Compensation Office by employee;(2) compact between tribe and state did not evince intent that state would retain jurisdiction over workers' compensation claims;(3) fact that compact between state and tribe gave tribe jurisdiction over tort claims, did not mean that state would have to expressly grant tribe jurisdiction over workers' compensation claims; and (4) ordinance passed by tribe regarding its intention to exercise jurisdiction over workers' compensation claims did not have to be signed by tribal chairman and state governor, and be approved by Secretary of Interior, in order to be effective.
Subjects: Mashantucket Pequot Gaming Enterprise -- Employees; Casinos -- Mashantucket Pequot Tribe of Connecticut; Foxwoods Resort Casino (Mass.); Gambling on Indian reservations; Indian gaming; United States. Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993; Sovereign immunity -- Mashantucket Pequot Tribe of Connecticut; Jurisdiction-- Connecticut.
*Synopsis: (from the opinion) The defendants, eight individuals who formerly were, employed by the Mashantucket Pequot Gaming Enterprise at Foxwoods Resort Casino, move to dismiss this wrongful termination action on the grounds that the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction and that the court lacks personal jurisdiction. First, the defendants claim that the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because (1) they are protected by tribal sovereign immunity since they are or were employees, officers and/or officials of the gaming enterprise; and (2) it would infringe on tribal self-governance if a state court were to exercise jurisdiction over a tribal employment matter. Secondly, the defendants claim that the court lacks personal jurisdiction due to insufficient service of process. The defendants' motion to dismiss is granted.
*Holding: not available
Subjects: Parent and child (Law); Trials (Custody of children) -- South Dakota; Indian children -- Legal status, laws, etc.; Child welfare; United States. Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978; Tribal members -- Rosebud Sioux Tribe of the Rosebud Indian Reservation, South Dakota; Jurisdiction -- Rosebud Sioux Tribe of the Rosebud Indian Reservation, South Dakota.
*Synopsis: State moved to terminate father's parental rights. The Fifth Judicial Circuit Court, Brown County, Jack Von Wald, J., terminated father's parental rights pursuant to Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA), and father appealed.
*Holding: The Supreme Court held that: (1) mother was entitled to relief from judgment voluntarily terminating her parental rights; (2) caseworker for Department of Social Services was qualified to testify as expert under ICWA; (3) State made active efforts to provide remedial services and rehabilitative programs while father was incarcerated prior to terminating father's parental rights; and (4) serious emotional or physical harm would result to special needs child if father was allowed to retain custody.
Subjects: Oglala Sioux Tribe of the Pine Ridge Reservation, South Dakota; Suppression of evidence -- South Dakota; Traffic violations -- Off Indian reservations; Admissible evidence; Police pursuit driving -- On Indian reservations; South Dakota.
*Synopsis: The State argues that the magistrate court abused its discretion by suppressing all evidence gathered by a state law enforcement officer after going onto the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in pursuit of a tribal member. The State appeals raising one issue: Whether a state officer in fresh pursuit for a traffic violation may pursue a tribal member onto his reservation and gather evidence from the driver when the alleged crimes were committed off the reservation.
*Holding:
After hearing arguments and taking testimony on Defendant’s motion
to suppress, the magistrate held that State v. Spotted Horse, 462
NW2d 463 (SD 1990) required suppression of all evidence the officer obtained after
he entered the reservation. Everything the officer observed before the Defendant
went on the reservation was held admissible.
The court affirms.
Related News Stories: Court: Deputy Had No Jurisdiction (Rapid City Journal) 04/23, South Dakota Rejects Hicks Defense in Police Chase (Indianz.com) 4/23/04.
Subjects: Jurisdiction -- Montana; Jurisdiction -- Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation, Montana; Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation, Montana -- Members; Non-Indians; Fee lands -- Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation, Montana; Trust lands -- Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation, Montana; Brocksmith Land and Livestock (Mont.).
*Synopsis: Enrolled Indian tribe member brought action against closely-held company and its directors, alleging various claims based upon or arising out of alleged buy-sell agreements. Company and directors brought motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, as they had filed complaint in tribal court. The District Court of the Seventeenth Judicial District, Valley County, John C. McKeon, J., conditionally granted the motion to dismiss. Enrolled member appealed.
*Holding: The Supreme Court, Jim Regnier, J., held that district court could exercise doctrine of abstention and dismiss action because tribal court had assumed jurisdiction.
Subjects: Public schools -- Finance -- Montana; Columbia Schools Elementary School District (Mont.); Montana School Boards Association; Montana Rural Education Association; School Administrators of Montana; Indian students; American Indian education; Constitutional law.
*Synopsis: (from the opinion) This case involves a challenge to the constitutionality of Montana's current system for funding its public elementary and secondary schools. The constitutional provision involved reads as follows: Educational goals and duties. (1) It is the goal of the people to establish a system of education which will develop the full educational potential of each person. Equality of educational opportunity is guaranteed to each person of the state. (2) The state recognizes the distinct and unique cultural heritage of the American Indians and is committed in its educational goals to the preservation of their cultural integrity. (3) The legislature shall provide a basic system of free quality public elementary and secondary schools.
*Holding: not available
Subjects: Parent and child (Law); Trials (Custody of children) -- Michigan; Indian children -- Legal status, laws, etc.; Child welfare; United States. Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978; Evidence, Expert; Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians of Michigan.
*Synopsis: (from the opinion) Respondent-appellant argues that the testimony of William Holmes, MSW, did not meet the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) requirement that the trial court's determination be supported by the testimony of "qualified expert witnesses." 25 USC 1912(f). Respondent-appellant makes this argument based on Mr. Holmes' testimony that he could not give an opinion or recommendation on behalf of the tribe. Mr. Holmes is the Director of Social Services for the Pokagon Band of the Potawatami Indian tribe. He was qualified as an expert in Indian child welfare, without objection. Mr. Holmes opined that custody of the minor children by respondent-appellant would likely result in serious emotional or physical damage to the children.
*Holding: not available
Subjects: Parent and child (Law); Trials (Custody of children) -- California; Kern County (Calif.). Dept. of Human Services; Indian children -- Legal status, laws, etc.; Child welfare; United States. Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978.
*Synopsis: Lorianne S. appeals from an order terminating her parental rights (Welf. & Inst.Code, § 366.26) to her son, Jacob. She claims neither the court nor respondent Kern County Department of Human Services adequately investigated the possibility that Jacob could be an Indian child entitled to the protections afforded by the federal Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA; 25 U.S.C. § 1901 et seq.).
*Holding: The court holds that once the department makes the requisite showing of its compliance with 25 United States Code section 1912(a), any party claiming the department's actions were inadequate must raise that issue in the juvenile court for hearing thereon. Appellant's failure here to raise the matter below leaves us no record of error to review. Accordingly, we affirm. The order terminating parental rights is affirmed.
Subjects: Water rights -- New Mexico; Cities and towns -- New Mexico; Resource allocation -- New Mexico; Pueblos -- New Mexico; Pecos River Watershed (N.M. and Tex.); Las Vegas (N.M.); Gallinas River.
*Synopsis: Appeals were taken from an order of the District Court, Chaves County, LaFel E. Oman, D.J. pro tem., denying cross-motions for partial summary judgment in water rights dispute between city and state. The Court of Appeals, 110 N.M. 425 , 796 P.2d 1121, affirmed and remanded. On remand, the District Court, Harl D. Byrd, D.J. pro tem., recognized city's claim to water rights under doctrine but found in favor of State Engineer on parameters of city's pueblo right. City appealed and State Engineer cross-appealed. The Court of Appeals, 118 N.M. 257, 880 P.2d 868 , reversed and remanded. City filed petition for writ of certiorari.
*Holding: The Supreme Court, Serna, J., held that: (1) pueblo water rights doctrine was inconsistent with state's system of prior appropriation, overruling Cartwright v. Public Service Co. of New Mexico, 66 N.M. 64 , 343 P.2d 654, but (2) decision would be given limited prospective application with respect to city.
Subjects: Parent and child (Law); Trials (Custody of children) -- California; San Diego County (Calif.). Health and Human Services Agency; Indian children -- Legal status, laws, etc.; Child welfare; United States. Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978.
*Synopsis: County social services agency filed dependency petition on behalf of minor. The Superior Court, San Diego County, No. J514574A, Cynthia Bashant, J., terminated reunification services to minor's mother and continued jurisdiction over minor. Mother appealed.County social services agency filed dependency petition on behalf of minor. The Superior Court, San Diego County, No. J514574A, Cynthia Bashant, J., terminated reunification services to minor's mother and continued jurisdiction over minor. Mother appealed.
*Holding:The Court of Appeal, McDonald, J., held
that:
(1) social services agency failed to comply with notice provisions of Indian
Child Welfare Act (ICWA), and
(2) social services agency's failure to comply with ICWA notice requirements
was not cured by subsequent notices sent to Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)
and the tribe.
Reversed with directions.
Subjects: Water rights disputes; Water rights -- New Mexico; Cities and towns -- New Mexico; Resource allocation -- New Mexico; Pueblos -- New Mexico; Pecos River Watershed (N.M. and Tex.); Water rights -- Las Vegas (N.M.); Gallinas River.
*Synopsis: Appeals were taken from an order of the District Court, Chaves County, LaFel E. Oman, D.J. pro tem., denying cross-motions for partial summary judgment in water rights dispute between city and state. The Court of Appeals, 110 N.M. 425, 796 P.2d 1121, affirmed and remanded. On remand, the District Court, Harl D. Byrd, D.J. pro tem., recognized city's claim to water rights under doctrine but found in favor of State Engineer on parameters of city's pueblo right. City appealed and State Engineer cross-appealed. The Court of Appeals, 118 N.M. 257, 880 P.2d 868, reversed and remanded. City filed petition for writ of certiorari.
*Holding: The Supreme Court, Serna, J., held that: (1) pueblo water rights doctrine was inconsistent with state's system of prior appropriation, overruling Cartwright v. Public Service Co. of New Mexico, 66 N.M. 64, 343 P.2d 654, but (2) decision would be given limited prospective application with respect to city. Affirmed in part and remanded.
Subjects: Property tax; Fairbanks North Star Borough (Alaska); Tanana Chiefs Conference, Inc.; Charities; Lawyers -- Fees.
*Synopsis: Native nonprofit corporation appealed decision of borough assessor denying charitable-purpose tax exemption for various properties. The Superior Court, Fourth Judicial District, Fairbanks, Richard D. Savell, J., reversed, holding six properties where wholly or partially exempt. Parties appealed.
*Holding:
The Supreme Court, Eastaugh, J., held that:
(1) services provided by corporation on subject property were for charitable
purpose;
(2) assessor did not err in determining that village government services and
credit and finance activities on property were not for charitable purpose;
(3) spatial apportionment of floor of building was not error; and
(4) method of calculating award of attorney fees was fair.
Affirmed.
Visit the Archives for the Indian Law Bulletins to see cases from previous years.
Indian Law Bulletins are a current awareness service of the National Indian Law Library. The purpose of the Indian Law Bulletins is to provide succinct and timely information about new developments in Indian Law. See the About page for more information.
A note about links used in this document
Blue links on this page go to information available for free on the Internet. Green links go to information available on Westlaw which require a Westlaw account. The library is not affiliated with Thomson Reuters or Westlaw.
* Synopsis and holding provided under an agreement with Westlaw.
