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

25 ILR 1 (1998)

handle is hein.amindian/indlr0025 and id is 1 raw text is: INDIAN LAW REPORTEn A PUBLICATION OF THE AMERICAN INDIAN LAWYER TRAINING PROGRAM, INC. January 1998 Celebrating 25 Years of Service Volume 25, No. 1- ' Month in Brief Editors Note to Subscribers: The Indian Law Reporter has a new look. In prior volumes, cases were reported in alphabetical order within sections. Beginning with this issue-Vol. 25, No. 1-we are adding sub- headings in the Month in Brief so that readers can determine at a glance which court and/or jurisdiction issued the ruling. Cases will be reported in alphabetical order under the appropriate sub-heading. We hope you find the new arrangement of cases helpful. As always, we appreciate your support and welcome your comments. UNITED STATES COURTS OF APPEALS FIRST CIRCUIT Indian Civil Rights Act Settlements: Land Claims State Jurisdiction The First Circuit affirms the district court finding that the challenge to a tribal government policy concerning stumpage permits for logging on tribal lands is an internal tribal matter over which the tribal courts have exclusive jurisdiction, and the federal court is thus without jurisdiction over the action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 or under the laws of Maine. Akins, et al. v. Penobscot Nation, et al., No. 97-1644, 25 Indian L. Rep. 2001 (1st Cir., Nov. 17, 1997). EIGHTH CIRCUIT Jurisdiction, Federal Court. Comity Tribal Courts: Jurisdiction The Eighth Circuit denies a suggestion for rehearing en banc aud a petition for rehearing by the panel, following its earlier holding (24 Indian L. Rep. 2226) that the appellant timely filed his action in state court and was not later required to exhaust tribal court remedies because a tribal court was established after his complaint was filed in state court. Krempel v. Prairie Island Indian Community, et al., Nos. 95-2812 & 96-3573, 25 Indian L. Rep. 2005 (8th Cir., Oct. 29, 1997). Hunting, Fishing, Rapping and Gathering Rights Sovereignty- Sovereign Immunity; State The Eighth Circuit denies the suggestions for rehearing en banc and the petitions for rehearing by the panel following its holding (24 Indian L. Rep. 2197) affirming the district court's rulings in (1) Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. Min- nesota, 853 F. Supp. 1118 (D. Minn. 1994) (Mille Lacs 1); (2) Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. Minnesota, 861 F Supp. 784 (D. Minn. 1994) (Mille Lacs II); (3) Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. Minnesota, No. 3-94-1226 (D. Minn., Mar. 29, 1996) (Mille Lacs III); (4) Fond du Lac Band of Chippewa Indians v. Carlson, No. 5-92-159 (D. Minn., Mar. 18, 1996); and (5) Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. Minnesota, 952 F. Supp. 1362 (D. Minn. 1997) (Mille Lacs TV). Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians, et al. v. County of Aitkin, et al., Nos. 97-1757, 97-1764, 97-1768, 97-1770, 97-1771, 97-1772, 97-1774, 97-1937, 97-1938,25 Indian L. Rep. 2005 (8th Cir., Nov. 17, 1997). Hunting, Fishing, rapping and Gathering Rights Sovereignty: Sovereign Immunity; State The Eighth Circuit vacates its orders of stay pending resolu- tion of appeals following its earlier holdings (24 Indian L. Rep. 2197) in which the court affirmed the district court's rulings in: (1) Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. Minnesota, 853 F. Supp. 1118 (D. Minn. 1994) (Mille Lacs 1); (2) Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. Minnesota, 861 F Supp. 784 (D. Minn. 1994) (Mille Lacs I1); (3) Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. Minnesota, No. 3-94-1226 (D. Minn., Mar. 29, 1996) (Mille Lacs Il1); (4) Fond du Lac Band of Chippewa Indians v. Carl- son, No. 5-92-159 (D. Minn., Mar. 18, 1996); and (5) Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. Minnesota, 952 E Supp. 1362 (D. Minn. 1997) (Mille Lacs IV). Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians, et al. v. Minnesota, et al., Nos. 97-1757, 97-1764, 97- 1768, 97-1770, 97-1771, 97-1772, 97-1774, 97-1937, 97-1938, 25 Indian L. Rep. 2006 (8th Cir., Oct. 27, 1997). Voting Rights The Eighth Circuit affirms the district court's holdings that a third majority-minority district should be created to provide roughly proportional representation for Native American vot- ers but that the group of Native Americans is not sufficiently large or geographically compact to justify a majority-minority district for the School Board or the Village Board elections. Sta- bler, Jr., et al. v. County of Thurston, et al., Nos. 96-2964 & 96- 311, 25 Indian L. Rep. 2006 (8th Cir., Dec. 1, 1997). 25 ILR 1 Copyright © 1998 by the American Indian Lawyer Training Program, Inc. Rights of redistribution or reproduction belong to the copyright owner. ISSN-0097-1154

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