Legal Opinion
Pelt v. State of Utah
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided December 31, 1996No. 95-4135, 95-4136PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BALDOCK, Circuit Judge.
In these appeals, we must determine whether An Act to Permanently Set Aside Certain Lands in Utah as an Addition to the Navajo Indian Reservation, and for Other Purposes, 47 Stat. 1418 (1933), as amended by Pub.L. No. 90-306, 82 Stat. 121 (1968) (hereinafter “the 1933 Act”), 1 implied a cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty. Jake C. Pelt, Dan Benally, Jim Benally, Helen Cly, and Fred Johnson (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”), beneficiaries of a government fund created by the 1933 Act, assert that the district court erred by dismissing their complaint against Defendant…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Seminole Tribe of Florida v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Singleton v. WulffSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Cort v. AshSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- United States v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Atascadero State Hospital v. ScanlonSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Pelt v. UtahCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2008
- Dill v. City of EdmondCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1998
- Lybrook v. Members of the Farmington Municipal Schools Board of EducationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2000
- White Mountain Apache Tribe v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001
- Timpanogos Tribe v. ConwayCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2002
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.