Legal Opinion
Pearsall v. Tribal Council for the Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community
Grand Ronde Court of Appeals
Decided March 9, 2004PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MARK JOHNSON, Associate Justice.
This case arises peripherally from a larger dispute between petitioner and certain of his former colleagues on the Tribal Council. The dispute concerns a series of ethics cases brought under the now-repealed Tribal Ethical Standards Ordinance (TESO), former Tribal Code § 275.
An understanding of the procedural aspects of TESO contained at former Tribal Code section 275(f)(1), is important to understanding the issues presented by this case. An action under TESO was initiated by the filing of a sworn affidavit by the complainant against a tribal official…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Flast v. CohenSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Raines v. ByrdSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Synowski v. Confederated Tribes of Grand RondeGrand Ronde Court of Appeals · 2003
- Village of Mishongnovi v. HumeyestewaHopi Appellate Court · 1998
3Cited by3 opinions
- Pearsall v. Tribal CouncilGrand Ronde Tribal Court · 2005
- Pearsall v. Tribal Council for Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde Community of OregonGrand Ronde Court of Appeals · 2005
- Pearsall v. Tribal Council for the Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde CommunityGrand Ronde Tribal Court · 2004