From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

THREE AFFILIATED TRIBES v. WOLD ENGINEERING

Supreme Court of North Dakota
Aug 21, 1986
392 N.W.2d 87 (N.D. 1986)

Opinion

Civ. No. 10172.

August 21, 1986.

John O. Holm, Rapid City, S.D., and Raymond Cross, New Town, N.D., for plaintiff and appellant.

Gary H. Lee of Bosard, McCutcheon and Rau, Minot, N.D., for defendant, third-party plaintiff and appellee.


In Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation v. Wold Engineering, P.C., 321 N.W.2d 510 (N.D. 1982), we held that the district court lacked jurisdiction to hear the action brought by Three Affiliated Tribes. In Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation v. Wold Engineering, P.C., 467 U.S. 138, 104 S.Ct. 2267, 81 L.Ed.2d 113 (1984), the United States Supreme Court vacated our judgment and remanded for reconsideration. In Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation v. Wold Engineering, P.C., 364 N.W.2d 98 (N.D. 1985), we determined that Three Affiliated Tribes could bring their action in state court upon compliance with § 27-19-05, N.D.C.C.; that Ch. 27-19, N.D.C.C., terminated any residuary jurisdiction that may previously have existed; and vacated our previous opinion reported at Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation v. Wold Engineering, P.C., 321 N.W.2d 510 (N.D. 1982). In Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation v. Wold Engineering, P.C., 476 U.S. ___, ___, 106 S.Ct. 2305, 2314, 90 L.Ed.2d 881, 895 (1986), the United States Supreme Court reversed and remanded, stating:

"Our examination of the state, tribal, and federal interests implicated in this case, then, reinforces our conclusion that North Dakota's disclaimer of jurisdiction over suits such as this cannot be reconciled with the congressional plan embodied in Pub.L. 280.

"The judgment of the North Dakota Supreme Court is reversed and remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion."

In light of the determination of the United States Supreme Court, we vacate our opinion reported in Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation v. Wold Engineering, P.C., 364 N.W.2d 98 (N.D. 1985), substitute this opinion therefor, reverse the judgment of the district court and remand this case to the district court for trial.

ERICKSTAD, C.J., and VANDE WALLE, LEVINE, MESCHKE and GIERKE, JJ., concur.



Summaries of

THREE AFFILIATED TRIBES v. WOLD ENGINEERING

Supreme Court of North Dakota
Aug 21, 1986
392 N.W.2d 87 (N.D. 1986)
Case details for

THREE AFFILIATED TRIBES v. WOLD ENGINEERING

Case Details

Full title:THREE AFFILIATED TRIBES OF the FORT BERTHOLD RESERVATION, Plaintiff and…

Court:Supreme Court of North Dakota

Date published: Aug 21, 1986

Citations

392 N.W.2d 87 (N.D. 1986)

Citing Cases

Jicarilla Apache Tribe v. Bd. of Cty. Com'rs

The issue here is subject matter jurisdiction. See Kennerly v. District Court, 400 U.S. 423, 428-30, 91 S.Ct.…

In re Marriage of Jacobs v. Jacobs

Gladys bases her federal preemption argument not on any treaty, nor federal regulatory scheme, but on 28…