Ad
related to: tribal sovereign immunity cases today philippines news channel 12asia.nikkei.com has been visited by 100K+ users in the past month
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Tribal Sovereignty, Tribal Immunity Kiowa Tribe v. Manufacturing Technologies , 523 U.S. 751 (1998), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that an Indian Nation were entitled to sovereign immunity from contract lawsuits, whether made on or off reservation, or involving governmental or commercial activities.
This is a list of U.S. Supreme Court cases involving Native American Tribes.Included in the list are Supreme Court cases that have a major component that deals with the relationship between tribes, between a governmental entity and tribes, tribal sovereignty, tribal rights (including property, hunting, fishing, religion, etc.) and actions involving members of tribes.
During the time the case was pending, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Kiowa Tribe of Okla. v. Manufacturing Technologies, Inc. [2] In view of that decision, the decision of the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals was vacated and the case remanded. On remand, the Court of Civil Appeals held that the Potawatomi did have sovereign immunity and C & L ...
Apr. 27—The Alaska Supreme Court on Friday extended tribal sovereign immunity to a tribal consortium, overruling a decision it made 20 years ago that refused to take a similar step. In simple ...
Lewis v. Clarke, 581 U.S. ___ (2017), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled 8–0 that tribal sovereign immunity does not apply in a suit against a tribal employee in his individual capacity, and an indemnification provision cannot extend tribal sovereign immunity to cases in which it would otherwise not apply.
By way of the Tucker Act, certain claims of monetary damages against the United States are exempt from sovereign immunity. These cases are heard by the United States Court of Federal Claims, or, for cases involving less than ten thousand dollars, a district court has concurrent jurisdiction. Examples of contracts where immunity is waived include:
Sovereign immunity, or crown immunity, is a legal doctrine whereby a sovereign or state cannot commit a legal wrong and is immune from civil suit or criminal prosecution, strictly speaking in modern texts in its own courts.
Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community, 572 U.S. 782 (2014), was a United States Supreme Court case examining whether a federal court has jurisdiction over activity that violates the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act but takes place off Indian lands, and, if so, whether tribal sovereign immunity prevents a state from suing in federal court. [1]