Legal Opinion · Dissent

Tsosie v. Navajo Board of Election Supervisors

Navajo Nation Supreme Court

Decided October 28, 2014No. SC-CV-68-14Published

1Dissent

BLACK, Associate Justice by Designation,

Dissenting Opinion.

I respectfully dissent because the petition is insufficient and because the majority’s holding that the Supreme Court has writ jurisdiction to supervise the proceedings of the Navajo Board of Election Supervisors and the Navajo Election Administration is contrary to this Court’s precedents addressing the reach of 7 N.N.C. § 303(A).

The Petition for a Writ of Mandamus is insufficient on its face. The Petition for a Writ of Mandamus contains no copy of any order or resolution of the Navajo Board of Election Supervisors or any other…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Navajo Transport Services, Inc. v. SchroederNavajo Nation Supreme Court · 2007
  2. Shirley v. Office of Hearings & AppealsNavajo Nation Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Budget & Finance Committee v. Navajo Nation Office of HearingsNavajo Nation Supreme Court · 2006
  4. Begay v. Navajo Engineering & Construction AuthorityNavajo Nation Supreme Court · 2011
  5. Cedar Unified School District v. Navajo Nation Labor CommissionNavajo Nation Supreme Court · 2007

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API