Legal Opinion
Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York
District Court, W.D. New York
Decided February 7, 2003No. 85-CV-411CPublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CURTIN, District Judge.
The Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma has filed a motion pursuant to Rule 24(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to intervene as of right in this action, or in the alternative for joinder as a necessary party pursuant to Rule 19(a) (Item 215). The Seneca Nation of Indians as party plaintiff, the United States of America as plaintiff-intervenor (referred to collectively herein as “plaintiffs”), and the State of New York as defendant oppose intervention or joinder. Oral argument of the motion was heard by the court on January 21, 2003. For the following reasons,…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Arizona v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- National Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Heckman v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- United States v. Pitney Bowes, Inc., Edo Corporation Plessey, Inc. Vernitron Corp., Baii Banking Corp., Movant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994
- Arkwright-Boston Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Company v. The City Of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1985
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Canadian St. Regis Band of Mohawk Indians Ex Rel. Francis v. New YorkDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2003
- Citizens against Casino Gambling v. KempthorneDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 2007
- CITIZENS AGAIST CAS. GAM., ERIE CTY. v. KempthorneDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 2007