Legal Opinion
Cree v. Waterbury
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided March 6, 1996No. 95-35102PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
REA, District Judge.
Plaintiffs, members of the Yakama Indian Nation, brought this action to prevent defendants, Washington state officials and officers (the “State”), from applying state truck license and permit fees to members of the Yakama tribe. Plaintiffs claim that the fees violate the right to use public highways granted to the Yakama tribe under the Yakama Treaty. The district court granted summary judgment to the Yakama Indian Nation on the ground that the phrase “in common with,” as used in the Treaty in reference to the highway right, has been construed in Treaty fishing rights…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Mescalero Apache Tribe v. JonesSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Washington v. Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian TribeSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- United States v. WinansSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- Tulee v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Cree v. FloresCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- In Re Crystal Properties, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- United States v. SmiskinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- Yakama Indian Nation v. FloresDistrict Court, E.D. Washington · 1997
- New York v. Shinnecock Indian NationDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2007
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.