FALLON PAIUTE-SHOSHONE TRIBE OF NEVADA MAINTAINS TRIBAL JURISDICTION IN CIVIL ACTION CASE

BOULDER, CO – On March 9, 2000, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied the State of Nevada’s petition for rehearing in a case challenging tribal court jurisdiction over civil actions arising on a reservation that were brought by a tribal member against state officials in their individual capacities.  In November 1999, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 in favor of the Fallon Paiute-Shoshone Tribe saying that the tribal court does indeed have jurisdiction in this case.  With the denial of rehearing, that ruling now stands as final from the Court of Appeals.

The case began when, on two separate occasions, officers of the Nevada Division of Wildlife searched the property and confiscated possessions of a member of the Fallon Paiute-Shoshone Tribe who lives on the Tribe’s reservation.  On both occasions, the State determined that the tribal member committed no crime.  His possessions were returned, but in an allegedly damaged condition.  As a result, the tribal member sued the officers in tribal court for various violations of his rights.  The officers then contested the Tribe’s jurisdiction over the case.

The Native American Rights Fund (NARF) has represented the Fallon-Paiute Shoshone Tribe in this case since 1994.  Melody McCoy (Cherokee), NARF’s lead counsel in the case is very pleased with the decision.   “This is a terrific recognition by the federal judiciary that tribal courts are valid forums for resolving disputes that occur on Indian trust land and involve tribal members.  We’re not taking a position on whether these officers did anything wrong.  All that we’re saying is that the Tribe’s court can decide that issue in the first instance.”   McCoy added that the State has one more chance for review of this case, in the U.S. Supreme Court.  She indicated that the State has until June 7, 2000 within which to ask the Supreme Court to review the case, and “I’m sure the State will meet or beat that deadline.”

The March ninth ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals upholds prior decisions by the Tribal Appellate Court and the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada.