In an action by an Indian tribe seeking a declaration that the Secretary of the Interior’s implementation of the 1954 Ute Partition and Termination Act did not provide for an equitable and practicable division and distribution of water rights between “mixed-blood” and “full-blood” members of the tribe, dismissal of the action is affirmed where plaintiff could not rely on the continuing wrong doctrine to save its action from being untimely.
Read Ute Dist. Corp. v. Sec’y. of Interior, No. 08-4147
Appellate Information
Filed October 19, 2009
Judges
Opinion by Judge Briscoe
Counsel
For Appellant:
Shawn E. Draney, Max D. Wheeler, Camille N. Johnson, and Judith D. Wolferts, Snow, Christensen & Martineau, Salt Lake City, UT
For Appellees:
Katherine J. Barton, John C. Cruden, John K. Mangum, Elizabeth A. Peterson, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC
You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help
Civil Rights
Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Criminal
Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records
Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules
