Indigenous, Indian, and Aboriginal Law Commons^™

In Re Ronald Four Horns, 94-Ap-06 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., June 6, 1994), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals, the Court determined that the legal wife of the decedent, has the legal authority to determine the final resting place of her husband. No evidence was displayed to contradict the wife’s claim that her husband wished to be buried where his wife said he did.

Heavy Runner V. Heavy Runner, 93-Ap-11 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., May 11, 1994), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals the Court decided that the Blackfeet Tribal Court shall grant Full Faith & Credit to State Court Judgements, in this case the Flathead County District Court of Kalispell. The Court found that the lower tribal court erred in accepting jurisdiction over a dissolution of marriage petition which had been previously granted by the District Court of Kalispell. Respondent had an opportunity to appear in the State District Court to contest the divorce, but chose not to. A Decree of Dissolution was granted to the petitioner. The lower tribal court was ordered to make …

In Re Reprimand Of Davis & Haffeman, 93-Ap-27 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., May 11, 1994), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals, the Court clarified that attorney discipline for misconduct is an administrative decision that does not require a show cause hearing to decide the controversy. Rather, the attorneys are entitled to an administrative panel. Attorneys facing reprimand for misconduct may be allowed to complete their current case load, at the Courts discretion, until a final decision is made to determine their ability to practice law in tribal courts.

In Re Reprimand Of Davis & Haffeman, 93-Ap-27 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., May 11, 1994), Blackfeet Tribal Court

Court Decisions

In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals, the Court clarified that attorney discipline for misconduct is an administrative decision that does not require a show cause hearing to decide the controversy. Rather, the attorneys are entitled to an administrative panel. Attorneys facing reprimand for misconduct may be allowed to complete their current case load, at the Courts discretion, until a final decision is made to determine their ability to practice law in tribal courts.

In Re Ric, A Minor Child, 93-Ap-26 (Blkft. Ft. Ct. App., March 4, 1994), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals, the Court rescinded an order of the lower court which grated permanent custody to the mother because the child’s father was denied due process when he was not given any notification of the hearing. Even though there were attempts to locate the father, service could not be made. The Blackfeet Tribal Code allows for service by publication in the local newspaper, which was not attempted. The Court further ordered the father to keep his current address updated with law enforcement or his attorney.

In Re Decarlo Children, 93-Ap-24 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., Nov. 9, 1993), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals, the Court denied a petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by the natural mother of two children. The children were removed from her custody and placed with their grandmother. The Court denied the Writ pursuant to Ch. 11, Se. 26 of the Blackfeet Law and Order Code. The Court found there wasn't sufficient grounds for removal of the children from theri grandmother and subsequently recommended the lower court immediately hold a hearing to determine temporary custody of the children to prevent further unnecessary detainment.

Tribe V. Weatherwax, 93-Ap-13 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., Aug. 19, 1993), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals, the Court dismissed a DUI charge because the trial judge erred in the admission of evidence offered by the prosecution. The error occurred when proper foundation was not established to warrant admission of the evidence in accordance with the Rules of Evidence.

Whitford V. Skunkcap, 92-Ap-170 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., July 28, 1993), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals, the Court declined to hear an appeal concerning a right of way and easement, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Court concluded that the BIA is the sole entity that makes such determinations across trust property.

Tribe V. Meineke, 93-Ap-17 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., July 14, 1993), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals, the Court refused to hear an appeal due to untimely filing pursuant to Blackfeet Tribal Law and Order Code, Ch. 11, Sec. 13(E). The Court dismissed the case.

Tribe V. Mad Plume, 93-Ap-08 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., May 20, 1993), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

No abstract provided.

In Re Bull Shoe, 93-Ap-09 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., March 11, 1993), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals, the Court reversed a lower court decision that sentenced the Defendant to 35 days in the Blackfeet Chemical Dependency Program for detox. However, the Defendant was not represented by counsel, advised of his rights, nor had the opportunity to present evidence in his defense.

Cobell V. Cobell-Magee, 93-Ap-04 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., Feb. 3, 1993), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals, the Court reversed the lower court after the lower court denied a Motion for Relief from Judgement after the lower court failed to hold a hearing, pursuant to Rule 6 (C) (1), Ch. 9 of the Blackfeet Law and Order Code. The Court subsequently denied a stay on execution on judgement but ordered garnishment of appellants wages, held in escrow, until a hearing is held and final disposition is determined.

In Re Dubray Children, 93-Ap-02 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., Jan 12, 1993), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals, the Court clarified that when a Juvenile Officer reasonably acts to remove children from a alleged dangerous condition, the children's rights to Due Process are violated when no substantiating petition is presented to the Court within 48 hours, pursuant to Blackfeet Law and Order Code, Ch. 7, Sec. 4. The Children must be represented by counsel, and previous orders may be vacated, and children may be returned to parent from whom they were taken.

Dean Black Weasel V. Anna Black Weasel, 92-Ap-19 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App. November 16, 1992), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

The Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals denied the Appeal filed by Appellant Dean Black Weasel. Appellant is instructed to file a Motion of Reconsideration.

Burns V. Burns, 91-Ap-21 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., Sep. 27, 1992), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

• Petitioner is Lorraine Burns and she applied to the Blackfeet Court of Appeals for an issuance of a Writ of Supervisory Control requiring the Tribal Court to enforce all of its prior orders directing that Robert Burns, Respondent, be arrested for failure to pay her any of the sums due to her from the Decree of Dissolution and Stipulation with Regard to Division of Property. 

• Respondent was served, but did not respond.  

• The Appeals Court had already, twice, affirmed that Respondent be arrested for his failure to comply with the Decree of Dissolution and Stipulation. By a motion dated March …

  ---

  Go to article

Whitford V. Skunk Cap, 93-Ca-170 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., July 8, 1992), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals, the Court affirmed Due Process rights after the appellant was not allowed to present their case in Court after a hearing was not held and opinion subsequently issued. The plaintiffs were then denied access to their land after the respondent removed the road approach. This denial of access to their land threatened serious irreparable damage to their livestock. The case was remanded to the lower court to have a hearing to comport with the due process rights of the appellant

Rider V. Blackfeet Indian Housing Authority, 91-Ap-02 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., July 2, 1992), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals, the Court reversed a lower court decision which upheld an eviction of a tenant from tribal housing for drug related criminal activity. Pursuant to the Blackfeet Indians Housing Authority’s grievance policy, which assures tenants right to a hearing, procedure by which hearing may be obtained, right to examine documents, be represented by counsel, present evidence and arguments, and have a decision rendered solely upon facts based at the hearing, the tenant was denied those rights to due process. The Housing Authority did not follow its own grievance process. The eviction was stayed pending …

In Re Bear Medicine Children, 92-Ap-14 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., July 1, 1992), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

• 92)

• In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals concerning the determination of the best interests of children when deciding custody, the Appellate court remanded the case back to trial court because the children were not afforded the opportunity to have their best interests represented in court so the decision to determine their custody could be made. Child custody cases are not civil matters where failure to appear by one party results in default judgement. Failure of counsel to appear for one parent cannot undermine the rights of the children. If counsel could not appear, the court should have designated an …

  ---

  Go to article

Cobell V. Cobell-Magee, 91-Sc-01 (Blkft. Sup. Ct., June 29, 1992), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

• In an appeal to the Blackfeet Supreme Court, the Court addressed ten issues.

• 1) Whether the trial Court and Court of Appeals erred in providing a modification of custody where the Respondent had not filed a Petition for Modification of custody and where there was no proof that would support a modification? The Court determined that under the Blackfeet Tribal code, all divorces, including child custody and support, must be consummated with Montana State Law and abide by those standards, unless some specific provision of the tribal code requires otherwise. However, since the sole remaining minor, in this case, was …

  ---

  Go to article

In Re Tatsey Children, 91-J-72 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., May 28, 1992), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals, the Court granted a Writ of Habeas Corpus and ordered the immediate release of an individual erroneously placed in the BIA Jail on a 72 hour hold for failure to comply with a court order to get as assessment for drugs and alcohol by May 22, 1992. The underlying order arose from a custody dispute over Defendant’s children where the Defendant agreed to voluntarily see drug and alcohol evaluation. No evidence was present to substantiate involuntary commitment.

Racine V. Morgan, 92-Ap-07 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., May 11, 1992), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals, the Court the Court granted a defendant’s motion to dismiss, holding he may not be held liable if negligence of driver is not imputed to the owner. In this case, no facts support that the owner (defendant) of the vehicle was the driver of the vehicle when it collided with plaintiff’s vehicle. Fundamental rule of law recognizes that negligence of the driver cannot be imputed to the owner of the vehicle, absent special conditions. The Claim was dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.

In Re Custody Of Dfs, A Minor Child 92-Ap-4 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., April 29, 1992), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

• In the Blackfeet tribal Court of Appeals, the Court considered whether the best interests of a child surpass the interests of other interested parties.

• The Court affirmed a lower court decision awarding custody of DFS to the child's natural parents over the child’s grandparents. In the view of the Court, the interests of the minor child are paramount to the interests of all other interested parties. The Court will not disturb the findings of a lower court to the best interests of the child absent evidence that the lower court failed to adequately consider contrary evidence. It is the duty …

  ---

  Go to article

In Re Dfse, A Minor Child, 92-Ap-04 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., April 29, 1992), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

• In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals, the Court affirmed a lower court determination to award custody of a minor child to the child’s natural parents, over the objection of the grandparents, who also sought custody. The Court noted that the interests of the minor child are paramount to the interests of all other interested parties. It is the responsibility of the trial court judge to evaluate testimony that is made available to him at the trial level to ascertain what is best for the minor child. The Court recognizes that the natural aprents are the nuclear family and thus …

  ---

  Go to article

In Re Vielle Children, 92-Ap-05 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., April 27, 1992), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals, the Court vacated a prior temporary custody order which granted custody to the natural mother, and restored custody to the natural father. The Court reasoned that the previous temporary Custody Order was issued ex parte, directly to the judge without the other party’s knowledge, a practice that has been long prohibited. The lower court judge was removed from that case and deprived of all authority over this matter. This order violated due process rights of the father and the Blackfeet Law and Order Code.

In Re Vielle Children, 92-Ap-05 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., April 27, 1992), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals, the Court vacated a prior temporary custody order which granted custody to the natural mother, and restored custody to the natural father. The Court reasoned that the previous temporary Custody Order was issued ex parte, directly to the judge without the other party’s knowledge, a practice that has been long prohibited. The lower court judge was removed from that case and deprived of all authority over this matter. This order violated due process rights of the father and the Blackfeet Law and Order Code.

In Re Am, A Minor Child, 92-Ap-03 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., April 15, 1992), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals, the Court reversed a lower court order determining a dispute over an emergency custody order. Teh Court made the determination to reverse the lower court determination partly based on the lack of sufficient evidence to warrant emergency removal of the child. Ch. 7, Se. 4, of the Blackfeet Law and order Code requires a show cause hearing where evidence is presented to substantiate immediate and//or apparent danger of violence or serious bodily injury to the child. Additionally, a child is entitled to representation through guardian-ad-litem. The Court clarified that a Juvenile Officer is …

Tribe V. Glaze, 92-Ap-01 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., March 17, 1992), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

The Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals remanded this case back to the lower court for an immediate jury trial for two reasons. First, the court held that the Tribal Court exists to protect the rights of the people. The prosecutor was allowed to assume a case practically as it came before the bench does not ensure that an orderly, consistent, fair judicial process can be followed. The Tribal Court’s professionalism is allowed to be diminished during these times, in which the appellant’s are likely to find a substantiated basis to have decisions reversed. Second, the court held that once a …

Burns V. Burns, 88-Ca-579, 91-Ap-21 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., Dec. 17, 1991), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

The Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals upheld the trial court’s denial of a motion for reconsideration. The trial court held that under Rule 6, Chapter 11 of the Blackfeet Tribal Code, a motion for reconsideration must present the court with something that would make the judge change their previous ruling, such as newly discovered evidence.

Youngman V. England, 91-Ca-07, 91-Ap-13 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., Dec. 17, 1991), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

The Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals remanded the case to the trial court because the defendant was served only one day before trial and therefore did not have enough time to prepare, violating his right to due process.

Pollock V. Pollock, 91-Ap-10 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., October 25, 1991), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

The Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the lower court holding that the “General Rule” that the lower court judge used has broad latitude in defining what is beneficial to the child is affirmed. The “General Rule” used in the lower court is cited as 40-4-224 “Joint Custody-Modification-Consultation with Professionalism.”