Cases

EBEL, Circuit Judge. This case presents the question whether a large-scale excavation project—which involved the excavation, modification, and use of rock and soil during the installation of wind turbines—constituted “mining” under the pertinent federal regulations that address mineral development on Indian land. When an entity engages in “mining” of

Motion of American Wind Energy Association for leave to file a brief as amicus curiae granted. Motion of Osage County Farm Bureau, Inc., et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.

EDMONDSON, J. ¶ 1 The District Court of Osage County had three related but distinct proceedings before it involving wind farms in Osage County, and orders in each of the three were appealed to this Court.1 One of the appeals was adjudicated by our recent opinion in Mustang Run Wind Project, LLC v. Osage County Board of Adjustment, 2016 OK 113, 387 P.3d 333. The remaining two appeals ar

OSCN Found Document:OSAGE NATION v. BD. OF COMMISSIONERS OF OSAGE COUNTY and OSAGE NATION v. OSAGE COUNTY BD. OF ADJUSTMENT OSCN navigation Home Courts

In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 21-1746 (Filed: February 13, 2025) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * NAVAJO NATION, et al., * * Plaintiffs, * * v. * * THE UNITED STATES,

FILED United States Court of Appeals PUBLISH Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS May 4, 2021 Christopher M. Wolpert FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Clerk of Court

In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 19-1246 Filed: December 7, 2020 ) FLETCHER, et al., ) Tribal Trust; Native American Trust ) Management; Tucker Act; 28 U.S.C. § Plaintiffs, ) 1491; Indian Tucker Act; 28 U.S.C. §

JAMES O. BROWNING, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss *1219Counts 1 and 5 of the Indictment, filed September 24, 2018 (Doc. 72)("Motion"). The primary issues are whether: (i) a Navajo Nation Department of Public Safety ("NDPS") officer, Houston Largo, was a fe

Appellate Case: 20-2145 Document: 010110830843 Date Filed: 03/22/2023 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals PUBLISH Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS March 22, 2023

CORRECTED In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 16-492L (Filed: September 29, 2020) ) CHEMEHUEVI INDIAN TRIBE, ) RCFC 12(b)(1); RCFC 12(b)(6); ) Tucker Act jurisdiction; Indian Plaintiff,

ORDER These matters are before the court on the separate Petitions for Rehearing En Banc filed by Intervenors Northern Arapaho Tribe and Eastern Shoshone Tribe. We also have responses to the petitions from the State of Wyoming and the Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation. Upon consideration, the petitions were circulated to all the judges of the court who are in regular active service and who are not recused. S

TYMKOVICH, Chief Judge. This case requires us to determine whether Congress diminished the boundaries of the Wind River Reservation in Wyoming in 1905. We find that it did. The Eastern Shoshone and Northern Arapaho Tribes jointly inhabit the Wind River Reservation. The State of Wyoming and the Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation challenge a decision by the Environmental Protection Agency granting the Tribes’ a

■ Indian Tribe Claims; Breach of Trust Obligations; Partial Summary Judgment; Law of the Case; Binding Effect of Government-Sponsored Accounting Reports; Establishing Government Duties to Tribes; Congressional Reference; Statute of Limitations in Tribal Claims; Res Judicata. OPINION AND ORDER ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT WHEELER, Judge

Indian Tribe Claims; Breach of Fiduciary Duty; Breach of Trust Obligations; Partial Summary Judgment; Binding Effect of Government-Sponsored Accounting Reports. OPINION AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT WHEELER, Judge. This case involves the claims of the Qua-paw Indian Tribe of Oklahoma fo

ORDER GAJARSA, Circuit Judge. The United States petitions for a writ of mandamus to direct the Court of Federal Claims (“trial court”) to vacate its orders requiring the United States to produce documents that it asserts are protected by the attorney-client privilege. Jicarilla Apache Nation (“Jicarilla”) opposes. We hold that the United Sta

Indian Tribe Claims; Breach of Trust Obligations; Breach of Fiduciary Duty; Indian Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1505; Arizona-Florida Land Exchange Act of 1988, Pub.L. No. 100-696; 25 U.S.C. § 162a; American Indian Trust Fund Management Reform Act of 1994, Pub.L. No. 103-412; Motion to Dismiss; Subject Matter Jurisdiction; ' Rule 12(b)(1); Failure to State a Claim; Rule 12(b)(6); Statute of Limitations; 28 U.S.C. § 250

ORDER ALLEGRA, Judge. Pending before the court, in this tribal trust case, are myriad discovery-related motions. Plaintiff seeks to compel the production of documents that defendant claims are privileged and, at the same time, seeks a protective order to prevent the discovery of investment information it claims is irrelevant to the subject case. Defendant resists both motions and, for its own part, has filed

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ON THE GOVERNMENT’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND ORDER BRADEN, Judge. To facilitate a review of this Memorandum Opinion and Order, the court has provided the following outline: I. RELEVANT FACTUAL BACKGROUND ox o 00 A. Prior to November 5, 1990. 07 o CO B. After November 5,1990. cn o Gi II.PROCEDURAL HISTORY.508

Tribal trust case; Trial; Standard of review; Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribes — statutes give rise to fiduciary obligation to maximize trust income by prudent investment; Breach of trust — investment decisions; Underinvestment — investing in short-term investments/laek of diversification; Liquidity; Pooling; Unauthorized disbursements; Deposit lag; Negative interest; Damages; Standard for damages for b

This Opinion is a Precedent of the TTAB Mailed: May 29, 2020 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE _____ Trademark Trial and Appeal Board _____ New Era Cap Co., Inc. v.