Legal Opinion
Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribes of Indians v. United States
United States Court of Claims
Decided January 12, 1983No. Nos. 342-70, 343-70PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LYDON, Judge:
On November 4, 1982, a motion to intervene, under USCC Rule 24(a), was filed by seven individuals on their own behalf and on behalf of all other Indians of the Hoopa Valley Reservation who are plaintiffs in Short v. United States, 202 Ct.Cl. 870, 486 F.2d 561 (1973), cert. denied, 416 U.S. 961, 94 S.Ct. 1981, 40 L.Ed.2d 313 (1974). See Hoopa Valley Tribe v. United States, 219 Ct.Cl. 492, 596 F.2d 435 (1979) and Short v. United States, Defendant and Hoopa Valley Tribe of Indians, Defendant-Intervenor, Ct.Cl. No. 102-63, decided September 23, 1981.1
*294The catalyst for the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- National Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Hoopa Valley Tribe v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1979
- Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribes of Indians of Oklahoma v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1975
- Theophilus McCLAIN, Appellant, v. WAGNER ELECTRIC CORPORATION, AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1977
- Short v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1973
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Eskridge Research Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2010
- John R. Sand & Gravel Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2004
- Osage Tribe v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2008
- Chippewa Cree Tribe of Rocky Boy's Reservation v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009
- Ackley v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1987
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.