Legal Opinion
Oneida Indian Nation v. New York
District Court, N.D. New York
Decided October 11, 1983No. 79-CV-798PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
McCURN, District Judge.
The Houdenosaunee and its constituent nations, except the Cayuga Nation, have renewed their previously-denied motion to intervene in this action as a plaintiff and to file a proposed complaint-in-intervention pursuant to Rule 24(a)(2) or, alternatively, Rule 24(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For the reasons herein, the motion is denied.
Familiarity with the general nature of this lawsuit is assumed. The background of this particular issue is recounted in footnote 3 of this Court’s decision in 520 F.Supp. 1278, 1284 (July 24,…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Trbovich v. United Mine WorkersSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- United States Postal Service v. BrennanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1978
- Harry J. Stadin v. Union Electric CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1962
- Ionian Shipping Company, and Allied Chemical Corporation, Intervenor-Appellant v. British Law Insurance Co., Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1970
- Oneida Indian Nation of NY v. State of NYDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 1981
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Town of East HamptonDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1998
- Oneida of the Thames Band, Oneida Indian Nation of Wisconsin, the Houdenosaunee, Plaintiffs-Intervenors-Appellees v. State of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1985
- Washington Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1990
- Washington Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1990
- Oneida Indian Nation v. New YorkDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 1984
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.