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.
![handle is hein.amindian/indlr0040 and id is 1 raw text is:
INDIAN LAW REPORTER
A PUBLICATION OF THE AMERICAN INDIAN LAWYER TRAINING PROGRAM, INC.
January 2013 Celebrating 40 Years of Service Volume 40, No. 1
[r. .1I
Month in Brief
UNITED STATES
COURTS OF APPEALS
EIGHTH CIRCUIT
Civil Jurisdiction and Procedure
Gaming: Indian Gaming Regulatory Act
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirms
the district court's ruling under Civil Procedure Rule 60(b)(5)
relieving the defendant-appellant of prospective compliance with
the district court's 1994 consent decree involving the City of
Duluth and the Fond Du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa
but reverses the district court's denial of the Band's request for
retrospective relieve under Rule 60(b)(6) and remands for fur-
ther proceedings. City of Duluth v. Fond du Lac Band of Lake
Superior Chippewa, Nos. 11-3883 and 11-3884, 40 Indian L.
Rep. 2001 (8th Cir., Jan. 14, 2013).
Criminal Jurisdiction and Procedure
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirms
appellant's conviction for conspiracy to commit bribery of an
Indian tribal official, and aiding and abetting a bribery involving
an agent of an Indian tribal government in violation of 19 U.S.C.
§§ 371, 666(a) and 2. United States v. Big Eagle, No. 11-3754,
40 Indian L. Rep. 2004 (8th Cir., Jan. 10, 2013).
NINTH CIRCUIT
Criminal Jurisdiction and Procedure: Major Crimes Act
Tribal Membership
Holding that (1) the tribal enrollment certificate was insuffi-
cient to establish that the defendant-appellant is an Indian for
purposes of federal jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 1153 because
the government introduced no evidence that the defendant-ap-
pellant's bloodline is derived from a federally-recognized tribe;
and (2) whether a tribe is federally-recognized as required for
jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 1153 is a question of fact for
the jury, not a question of law for the court, the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reverses the defendant-appel-
lant's convictions under § 1153, but finds that the conviction
for conspiracy in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 is unaffected by
the court's disposition, and remands for resentencing. United
States v. Zepeda, No. 10-10131, 40 Indian L. Rep. 2006 (9th
Cir., Jan. 18, 2013).
UNITED STATES
DISTRICT COURTS
DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Jurisdiction, Federal Court
Leases and Leasing: Oil & Gas Leases
Sovereignty: Sovereign Immunity; Tribal
In an action concerning the ownership of the oil and gas
estate and the coalbed methane gas underlying an 80-acre parcel
of land within the Southern Ute Tribe's reservation, the U.S. Dis-
trict Court for the District of Colorado concludes that because the
plaintiff failed to show that the Tribe unequivocally and express-
ly waived its sovereign immunity from the suit, the court grants
the Tribe's motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdic-
tion. Farmer Oil and Gas Properties, LLC v. Southern Ute
Indian Tribe, Civ. No. 12-cv-00313-LTB, 40 Indian L. Rep.
3001 (D. Colo., Oct. 12, 2012).
DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA
Civil Jurisdiction and Procedure
The U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota grants
the plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order enjoining
the defendants from interfering with the plaintiffs' rights and
interests in property located within the Turtle Mountain Indian
Reservation. Gustafson v. Poitra, et al., No. 4:12-cv-129, 40
Indian L. Rep. 0000 (D.N.D., Oct. 5, 2012).
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Jurisdiction, Federal Court: Exhaustion of Tribal Remedies
Sovereignty: Sovereign Immunity; Tribal
Tribal Courts: Jurisdiction
Tribal Government
In a declaratory judgment action in which the Thlopthlocco
Tribal Town seeks a finding that the members of the Thlopthloc-
co Business Committee are the lawful leaders of Thlopthlocco
and to void certain actions by individual defendants, the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma finds that:
(1) there is no final decision by the tribal courts as to whether
they retain jurisdiction over the Anderson I cross-defendants
and Anderson ]1 defendants; (2) the court is without jurisdiction
because the defendants enjoy sovereign immunity as judicial
officers of the Muscogee Creek Nation; (3) the plaintiff has
40 ILR 1
Copyright © 2013 by the American Indian Lawyer Training Program, Inc.
Rights of redistribution or reproduction belong to the copyright owner.
ISSN-0097-1 154](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.amindian/indlr0040&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)