Stimsen Lumber Co. v. Coer D’Alene Tribe (U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho) In a contract dispute between Stimson Lumber Company and Defendant Coer d’Alene Tribe, the Tribe raised jurisdictional arguments in a Motion to Dismiss, which the Court granted because the Tribe was not a corporation and therefore not a citizen of any state. Topics: Contracts; Sovereign Immunity Chegup v. Ute Indian Tribes of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation (United States District Court for the District of Utah) The Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation temporarily banished four members. The banished members did not challenge their temporary banishment in a tribal forum, but instead sought relief in federal court by filing a petition for habeas corpus. The banished members contended that, because they were excluded from the reservation by virtue of their banishment, they were “detained” within the meaning of ICRA. The district court disagreed and dismissed the suit without considering the Tribe’s alternative position: that the court could not consider the claims at all because the banished members failed to exhaust their tribal remedies. The appeal court reversed and remanded with instructions to decide on the issue of exhaustion of tribal remedies. On remand, the District Court for the District of Utah granted the Defendant-Tribe’s Motion to Dismiss for the Plaintiffs’ failure to exhaust their tribal remedies. Topics: Tribal Law; Tribal Courts; Banishment Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe of Michigan v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Northern Division) The Tribe sued Blue Cross for failing to fulfill its fiduciary duties in administering tribal health insurance plans for not insisting on “Medicare-like rates.” The lower court granted summary judgment to Blue Cross, concluding that the Tribe’s payments for qualified CHS care through the Blue Cross plans were not eligible for Medicare-like rates. On appeal, the Court found that the district court interpreted the relevant federal regulations as limiting the requirement of Medicare-like rates to payments for care that was authorized by CHS, provided to tribal members by Medicare-participating hospitals, and directly paid for with CHS funds. The case was reverse and remanded to the District Court. In November 2022, the District Court issued an opinion relating to discovery disputes, granting the Tribe’s Motion to Compel discovery, and denying Blue Cross Blue Shield’s Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Supplemental Expert Witness Disclosure. Topics: Tribal Contract Health; Health Care; Medicare Like Rates Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe v. County of Mille Lacs (United States District Court, D. Minnesota) The suit arises out of a challenge to an interim, cooperative law enforcement agreement between tribal law enforcement and county law enforcement. Plaintiff’s reservation was established by an 1855 Treaty. The County claims that the reservation was diminished or disestablished in subsequent treaties, statutes, and agreements. The County used that argument to say that tribal law officers lack jurisdiction within the County. In 2020, the lower court granted the Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendants filed an interlocutory appeal asserting Plaintiff’s did not have a cause of action under the principle of immunity. No mention was made of mootness at this time. Following the initial filing and while waiting for oral argument, Defendants then filed a motion to dismiss for mootness. The eighth circuit denied the motion to dismiss for mootness, and on March 7 th , kept the reservation intact. In the District Court, the parties moved for summary judgement, and the Court granted in part and denied in part Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment Awarding Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, and granted in part, denied in part and denied as moot in part the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgement. Topics: Treaty Rights; Reservation Boundaries
22
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs