About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

18 ILR 1 (1991)

handle is hein.amindian/indlr0018 and id is 1 raw text is: January 1991 UNITED STATES COURTS OF APPEALS Jurisdiction, Federal Court: Federal Question, Generally State Jurisdiction Applying the Supreme Court's ruling in Oklahoma Tax Commission v. Graham, 489 U.S. 838 (1989), the Tenth Cir- cuit reverses the district court's denial of a motion to remand to state court in a case involving a tax claim by the Oklahoma Tax Commission against the Wyandotte Tribe of Oklahoma on the grounds that a defense of tribal sovereign immunity to suit does not constitute a substantial question of federal law sufficient to vest jurisdiction in the federal district court. Oklahoma ex rel. Oklahoma Tax Comm'n v. Wyandotte Tribe of Oklahoma, No. 90-5100, 18 Indiai, L. Rep. 2001 (10th Cir., Nov. 26, 1990). UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTS Constitution, United States: Equal Protection Clause Privileges and Immunities Clause Sources of Federal Authority Over Indian Affairs: Constitution, United States In an action brought by a member of the Cherokee Nation, Indians who are not members of any federally recognized tribe or pueblo, and non-Indians who were previously licensed to sell wares in the H-I Historic Old Town Zone in Albuquerque, New Mexico, challenging an ordinance which allows only New Mexico residents who are members of feder- ally recognized tribes or pueblos or of the Navajo Nation to sell wares in Old Town, the district court holds that the ordi- nance violates both the privileges and immunities clause and the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution. Tafoya, et al. v. City of Albuquerque, et al., Noi. CIV-89-1348 SC, 18 Indian L. Rep. 3001 (D.N.M., Oct. 30, 1990). Jurisdiction, Federal Court Tribal Law In a trespass action filed by the United States on behalf of the Crow Tribe in which plaintiff alleges that defendants, Crow tribal members residing within the exterior boundaries of the Crow Reservation, grazed li iestock on all or parts of three tribal units without a grazing Ihermit and without paying grazing fees in violation of a tribal ordinance, the district cnurrtreats defendants' motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judgment and dismisses for lack of jurisdiction. United States v. Plainbull, et al., No. CV 89-193-BLG-JFB, 18 Indian L. Rep. 3003 (D. Mont., Nov. 27, 1990). UNITED STATES CLAIMS COURT Alaska Native Claihs Settlement Act Claims Court The U.S. Claims Court holds that having conceded that he has no legal claim against the United States nor any equitable claim, there is no amount equitably due to plaintiff from the United States ;is a result of plaintiff's legal services rendered to the InupiE and that any payment which Congress may award to plaintiff for such services prior to the enactment of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act would be a gratuity. Paul v. United States, No. 2-88, 18 Indian L. Rep. 4001 (Cl. Ct., Nov. 7, 1990). 18 ILR 1 Copyright © 1991 by the American Indian Lawyer Training Program, Inc. Rights of redistribution or reproduction belong to copyright owner. ISSN-0097-1 154 INDIAN LAW REPORTER A PUBLICATION OF THE AMERICAN INDIAN LAWYER TRAINING PROGRAM, INC. Volume 18, No. 1 Month-in-Brief

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most