11 results for 'cat:"Native Americans" AND cat:"Water"'.
J. Tookey finds the Land Use Board of Appeals erred in determining that The Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon did not preserve its right to appeal over issues related to a new business development. “Board had fair notice of the Tribe’s assertion that an evaluation of the ‘no net loss’ standard implicated consideration of the Tribe’s treaty-protected fishery resource.” Reversed.
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals, Judge: Tookey, Filed On: May 1, 2024, Case #: A183421, Categories: native Americans, Zoning, water
J. Dyk finds that the claims court improperly ruled against an Indian tribe in various claims concerning water rights and water related infrastructure because the Tucker Act sufficiently establishes the U.S.'s duty to properly manage existing water infrastructure. Reversed in part.
Court: Federal Circuit, Judge: Dyk, Filed On: April 25, 2024, Case #: 2021-1880, Categories: Property, native Americans, water
J. Zilly denies the trucking company's motion to modify or vacate the consent decree entered on Dec. 8, 2020, regarding the government's complaint accusing the trucking company of violating the Clean Water Act by discharging fill material into wetlands and streams. The trucking company asserts that wetlands separated from other United States waters by man-made dikes or barriers do not count as adjacent wetlands, but the case the trucking company cites recognizes that the CWA prevents a landowner from carving out wetlands from federal jurisdiction using a barrier.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Zilly, Filed On: December 8, 2023, Case #: 2:18cv747, NOS: Environmental Matters - Other Suits, Categories: Environment, native Americans, water
J. Sung finds that the district court improperly dismissed a matter for failure to state a claim in a Northwestern Band of the Shoshone Nation complaint against Idaho state officials concerning the interpretation of the 1868 Treaty of Fort Bridger between the United States and several bands of the Shoshone and Bannock Tribes. Under the treaty, the Shoshone and Bannock Tribes ceded most of their territory to the United States. At the same time, the Tribes expressly reserved their right to hunt on unoccupied lands of the United States. The 1868 Treaty does not make maintenance of the Tribes’ reserved hunting rights contingent on permanent residence. Reversed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Sung, Filed On: October 17, 2023, Case #: 22-35140, Categories: Property, native Americans, water
J. Collins finds that the district court properly granted summary judgment to the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community, Tulalip Tribes and Upper Skagit Indian Tribe in a long-running case regarding Indian fishing rights in certain waters in Washington state. The Swinomish Tribe met their burden to show that there was no evidence in the record of historical fishing by the Lummi Nation in the disputed waters. Affirmed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Collins, Filed On: October 3, 2023, Case #: 21-35812, Categories: Evidence, native Americans, water
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Riggs finds that no occupying country or government, including Mexico, Spain, or the U.S., ever extinguished the aboriginal water rights of the Pueblo Indians because none of the countries took actions to intervene or reduce the tribe's use of the Jemez Valley River Basin.
Court: USDC New Mexico, Judge: Riggs, Filed On: September 28, 2023, Case #: 6:83cv1041, NOS: Constitutionality of State Statutes - Other Suits, Categories: Environment, native Americans, water
J. Collins finds that the district court properly granted summary judgment to a number of Indian communities in a long-running case regarding Indian fishing rights in certain waters of Washington state. The dispute involved fishing places in which the Lummi Nation have fishing rights under a 1974 decree over the waters east of Whidbey Island in Puget Sound. The district court correctly held that the Indian communities, the Swinomish, Tulalip, and Upper Skagit carried their burden to warrant a ruling under the decree that the Lummi’s usual and accustomed fishing grounds and stations did not extend to the disputed waters at issue. Affirmed.
Court: 9th Circuit, Judge: Collins, Filed On: September 11, 2023, Case #: 21-35812, Categories: native Americans, water
J. Clark affirms the state government department's July 2023 orders denying stays regarding the property owners' claim that the water diversions from the Upper Klamath Lake (UKL) would not have caused substantial harm to the Klamath Tribe. Diverting the water from UKL as the property owners intended would have brought UKL to lake levels that would leave the tribe's water rights unfulfilled, which qualifies as substantial harm because that would deprive the tribe, fish listed under the Endangered Species Act, and senior appropriators of the necessary water.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Clarke, Filed On: August 9, 2023, Case #: 1:23cv930, NOS: Other Statutory Actions - Other Suits, Categories: Environment, native Americans, water
J. Thapar finds the lower court properly denied the fishing and wildlife coalition's motion to intervene because it believed at the time of the motion that the state of Michigan and several Native American tribes were less than a month from finalizing a new consent decree regarding regulation of Great Lakes fisheries. The last-minute nature of the motion, when combined with evidence Michigan intends to protect the coalition's interests during negotiations and the ultimate consent decree, weigh against granting the coalition party status in the case, especially considering the last round of negotiations began more than three years ago. Affirmed.
Court: 6th Circuit, Judge: Thapar, Filed On: May 23, 2023, Case #: 22-1946, Categories: Civil Procedure, native Americans, water