jump to navigation

Green Tree Servicing, LLC v. Duncan — Navajo Supreme Court September 7, 2008

Posted by rezjudicata in Navajo Supreme Court, Tribal Courts.
1 comment so far

Navajo Supreme Court says federal Bankrupcy Code does not protect assignees of debtor; invalidates arbitration clause under Navajo Fundamental Law.

Green Tree Servicing, LLC v. Duncan, No. SC-CV-46-05 (Nav. Sup Ct. Aug. 18, 2008)

Issues: Federal Law > Bankruptcies >> Automatic Stays; Navajo Fundamental Law > Contracts >> Arbitration Clauses

After Conseco filed for bankruptcy, Green Tree purchased Conseco’s loan servicing contracts. This included Duncan’s loan for the purchase of a mobile home. Sometime later Green Tree filed a repossession action against Duncan. Duncan counterclaimed for fraud, harassment, and assault. Does the “automatic stay” provision of the Bankruptcy Code bar Duncan’s counterclaims? If not, did an arbitration clause in the original contract bar the counterclaims?

(more…)

Advertisements

Dawes v. Eriacho – Navajo Supreme Court May 16, 2008

Posted by rezjudicata in Navajo Supreme Court, Tribal Courts.
add a comment

“You don’t have to write what you say, but you have to say something”—Navajo Supreme Court clarifies Navajo Code of Criminal Procedure Rule 15(d).

Dawes v. Eriacho, No SC-CV-09-08 (Nav. Sup. Ct. May 5, 2008)

Issue(s): Criminal Procedure > Pretrial Detention >> Bail or Bond >>> Requirements

Navajo Code of Criminal Procedure Rule 15(d) requires judges state the reasons for denying bail “for the record.” At Dawes’ initial appearance, the district court allegedly denied bail because Dawes lived in Albuquerque and therefore was a flight risk. From detention, Dawes filed a written request for release, but the district court did not respond. Did the district court violate Rule 15(d)?

(more…)

Navajo Supreme Court Rules Incarceration of Children for Disorderly Conduct Illegal April 27, 2008

Posted by rezjudicata in Navajo Supreme Court, Tribal Courts.
add a comment

In re N.B., No. SC-CV-03-08 (Nav. Sup. Ct. Apr. 16, 2008)

Issue(s): Navajo Law > Habeas Corpus; Navajo Law > Juvenile Justice >> Dispositions >>> Incarceration; Navajo Law > Fundamental Law >> Diné bi beenehaz’áanii

After the Family Court adjudicated N.B. a delinquent for disorderly conduct, it placed him on suspended probation. N.B., however, failed to comply with the court’s conditions. In response, the court revoked N.B.’s probation and jailed him. If under Navajo law the court could not imprison an adult for disorderly conduct, could the court imprison N.B. for the same offense?

(more…)

Cherokee Supreme Court Rejects Council Members’ Claims for Legal Fees March 28, 2008

Posted by rezjudicata in Cherokee Supreme Court, Tribal Courts.
add a comment

Cherokee Nation v. O’Leary, SC-2006-13 (Cher. Sup. Ct. Jan. 22, 2008)

Issue(s): Cherokee Law > Council Legal Fees >> Reimbursement; Cherokee Constitutional Law > Separation of Powers >> Council Members >>> Enumerated Authorities

After discovering suspected wrongdoing by the Principal Chief and several executives, seven Cherokee Tribal Council members (Appellants) hired lawyers to pursue legal action. Appellants sued the Chief and others “on behalf of the Nation,” but without formal approval of the tribal council as a whole. Appellants then requested that the Cherokee Nation cover the Appellants’ legal costs. Is the Nation obligated to recoup Appellants’ legal expenses?

(more…)

Navajo Supreme Court Upholds Family Court’s Jurisdiction over Non-resident Navajo Children March 21, 2008

Posted by rezjudicata in Navajo Supreme Court, Tribal Courts.
add a comment

Miles v. Chinle Family Court, No. SC-CV-04-08 (Nav. Sup. Ct. Feb. 21, 2008)

Issue(s): Jurisdiction > Subject Matter Jurisdiction >> Custody >>> Non-resident Members; Navajo Law > Due Process >> Notice Requirements

After his relationship with the Mother failed, Miles took their daughter and left the Navajo Nation. Sometime later, the Family Court granted the Mother’s motions for immediate custody and writ of habeas corpus. The Mother, however, never successfully served Miles. While the daughter is a member of the Nation, Miles is not. Did the Family Court have jurisdiction over the Mother’s motions? If so, the court violate Miles’s due process rights by issuing the custody orders without notice to Miles?

(more…)

Fort Peck Court of Appeals Rules on Timing of Rights Admonishments February 17, 2008

Posted by rezjudicata in Fort Peck Court of Appeals, Tribal Courts.
add a comment

Fort Peck Tribes v. First, No. 467 (Ft. Peck App. Jan. 25, 2008)

Issue(s): Criminal Procedure > Post-arrest Admonishments

Upon arrest, the Fort Peck Tribal Code requires police officers to “immediately” advise suspects of tribal rights. After First violated terms of his probation, the probation officer called the Tribal Police Department to arrest First. The officer did not advise First of his rights until the car ride to jail. By failing to admonish First at the scene of arrest, did the officer illegally detain the defendant?

(more…)

Little River Court of Appeals Upholds Conviction of Appellate Justice January 27, 2008

Posted by rezjudicata in Little River Band of Ottawa Indians Tribal Court of App, Tribal Courts.
add a comment

Champagne v. Little River Band of Ottawa Indians, No. 06-178-AP (Little Riv. B. App. June __ , 2007)

Issue(s): Jurisdiction > Criminal Jurisdiction >> Tribal Members; Jurisdiction > Criminal Jurisdiction >> Indian Country; Incorporation of State Law > Traditional Tribal Law >> Crimes; Little River Band Constitutional Law > Right to Jury >> Punishment

As an employee of the Little River Band, Justice Champagne often used his personal vehicle to accomplish work-related errands. While on a personal detour one day, Justice Champagne collided with another motorist. Justice Champagne sought reimbursement from the Tribe for his loss claiming he was headed to a client’s home. Caught in the lie, the Tribe prosecuted and convicted Justice Champagne for attempting to defraud the Tribe. Given that the Tribe incorporated the attempt statute from the Michigan criminal code, was the conviction proper?

(more…)

Hoopa Court of Appeals Rules on Death Benefits for Volunteer Workers January 25, 2008

Posted by rezjudicata in Hoopa Valley Tribal Court of Appeals, Tribal Courts.
add a comment

Cooper v. Hoopa Valley Tribal Council, No. C-03-065 (Hoopa App. Dec. __ , 2007)

Issue(s): Tribal Sovereign Immunity > Waiver; Employee Benefits > Death Benefits >> Volunteer Workers

By resolution, the Hoopa Valley Tribal Council extended the Tribe’s Worker’s Compensation Insurance coverage to volunteer workers. The worker’s compensation statute fixes death benefits at “four times the annual earnings from the Hoopa Valley Tribal Council.” Cooper’s father worked as a volunteer firefighter for the Tribe. Responding to an emergency call one day, he died in a car accident. Does the Tribe have to pay death benefits?

(more…)

Navajo Supreme Court Says Navajo Housing Authority Must Satisfy Judgment January 10, 2008

Posted by rezjudicata in Navajo Supreme Court, Tribal Courts.
add a comment

Tso v. Navajo Housing Authority, No. SC-CV-20-06 (Nav. Sup. Ct. Dec. 28, 2007)

Issue(s): Navajo Bill of Rights > Retroactive Legislation >> Ex Post Facto Laws; Federal Programs > Satisfaction of Judgments; Navajo Law > Diné bi’ ó’ool’iil

The Navajo Bill of Rights prohibits ex post facto legislation that strips individuals of their fundamental rights. After Tso won a judgment against the Navajo Housing Authority, the Navajo Council amended the code to expressly extend immunity to the Navajo Housing Authority and exempt it from execution. When Tso sought to enforce the judgment, the Housing Authority claimed the amended legislation prevented enforcement. As applied, is the amended legislation a prohibited ex post facto law? If so, do federal guidelines nevertheless prevent the Housing Authority from satisfying the judgment from federal funds?

(more…)

Navajo Supreme Court Issues Fundamental Law Opinion December 14, 2007

Posted by rezjudicata in Navajo Supreme Court, Tribal Courts.
add a comment

Joe v. Black, No. SC-CV-62-06 (Nav. Sup. Ct. Nov. 29, 2007)

Issue(s): Navajo Law > Fundamental Law >> Nályééh >>> Compatibility of Anglo Law; Torts > Comparative Negligence; Navajo Law > Fundamental Law >> Construction with Other Law

The Navajo concept of nályééh refers to a process of restoring relationships between injured parties and tortfeasors. Joe sued Black and several other parties for injuries when her car struck a horse that wandered into the highway. Joe reached settlements with some parties, but not all. And, Joe did not join some possible tortfeasors in her suit. Assuming that nályééh is a non-adversarial resolution method and comparative negligence is adversarial, can the court apply both concepts simultaneously?

(more…)