UNITED STATES v. PUEBLO DE ZIA

7 Citing cases

  1. Pueblo of Jemez v. United States

    No. CIV 12-0800 JB\JHR (D.N.M. Oct. 25, 2018)

    Before the ICC, the Pueblos alleged, among other things, that in 1848, they held aboriginal title to approximately 520,000 acres of lands in Sandoval County, New Mexico. See United States v. Pueblo De Zia, 474 F.2d 639 (Ct.Cl.1973)("Zia IV"). The Pueblos alleged that the United States had violated their aboriginal title, because other, non-Indian persons were allowed to claim and possess those same lands.

  2. Pueblo of Jemez v. United States

    No. CIV 12-0800 JB\JHR (D.N.M. Oct. 25, 2018)

    Before the ICC, the Pueblos alleged, among other things, that in 1848, they held aboriginal title to approximately 520,000 acres of lands in Sandoval County, New Mexico. See United States v. Pueblo De Zia, 474 F.2d 639 (Ct.Cl.1973)("Zia IV"). The Pueblos alleged that the United States had violated their aboriginal title, because other, non-Indian persons were allowed to claim and possess those same lands.

  3. Pueblo of Jemez v. United States

    350 F. Supp. 3d 1052 (D.N.M. 2018)   Cited 4 times
    Discussing the three exceptions to the exclusive use requirement

    Before the ICC, the Pueblos alleged, among other things, that in 1848, they held aboriginal title to approximately 520,000 acres of lands in Sandoval County, New Mexico. See United States v. Pueblo De Zia, 474 F.2d 639 (Ct.Cl.1973) (" Zia IV"). The Pueblos alleged that the United States had violated their aboriginal title, because other, non-Indian persons were allowed to claim and possess those same lands.

  4. Pueblo of Jemez v. United States

    430 F. Supp. 3d 943 (D.N.M. 2019)   Cited 4 times
    Finding that Jemez Pueblo occupied Banco Bonito fieldhouses over a 400-year period, but primarily between 1500 and 1650 C.E.

    In Jemez Pueblo's ICC litigation, Zia, Jemez, and Santa Ana Pueblos alleged that, in 1848, they held aboriginal title to approximately 520,000 acres in Sandoval County, New Mexico, and that the United States thereafter extinguished their aboriginal title, because the United States permitted other, non-Indian persons to claim and possess those same lands. See Am. Pet. -- ICC Docket No. 137 at 2-3, 24-25 (alleging that the "three Pueblos ... have a common interest" in 520,000 acres of land in northern New Mexico); See United States v. Pueblo De Zia, 474 F.2d 639, 641 (Ct. Cl. 1973) (" Zia IV"). 268.

  5. Pueblo Jemez v. United States

    790 F.3d 1143 (10th Cir. 2015)

    Accordingly, the district court held the Jemez Pueblo's QTA action was barred by sovereign immunity.See Pueblo of Zia v. United States, 474 F.2d 639, 641 (Ct.Cl.1973) (Zia IV); see also Pueblo of Zia, et al v. United States (Zia I), 11 Ind. Cl. Comm. 131 (1962); Pueblo of Zia v. United States, 165 Ct.Cl. 501 (1964) (Zia II ); Pueblo of Zia v. United States, 19 Ind. Cl. Comm. 56 (1968) (Zia III ).

  6. Pueblo Jemez v. United States

    790 F.3d 1143 (10th Cir. 2015)

    Accordingly, the district court held the Jemez Pueblo's QTA action was barred by sovereign immunity.See Pueblo of Zia v. United States, 474 F.2d 639, 641 (Ct.Cl.1973) (Zia IV); see also Pueblo of Zia, et al v. United States (Zia I), 11 Ind. Cl. Comm. 131 (1962); Pueblo of Zia v. United States, 165 Ct.Cl. 501 (1964) (Zia II ); Pueblo of Zia v. United States, 19 Ind. Cl. Comm. 56 (1968) (Zia III ).

  7. Pueblo of Jemez v. United States

    No. CIV 12-0800 RB/RHS (D.N.M. Sep. 24, 2013)   Cited 3 times

    After extensive litigation, the ICC found that the Pueblos were deprived of aboriginal title to the lands claimed therein through the actions of the United States. See Pueblo de Zia v. United States, 200 Ct. Cl. 601, 603, 474 F.2d 639, 641 (Ct. Cl. 1973). Ultimately, the Pueblos and the United States entered into a stipulation of settlement whereby a final judgment of $749,083.75 was entered in favor of the Pueblos on January 10, 1974. (Def. Ex. C, Doc. 14-3).