Legal Opinion
Masayesva v. Zah
District Court, D. Arizona
Decided March 11, 1992No. CIV 74-842 PCT EHCPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
Re: lands purchased by or on behalf of the Navajo Nation or privately owned lands relinquished pursuant to Sec. 2 of the 1934 Act.
CARROLL, District Judge.
Defendant Peterson Zah, on behalf of the Navajo Nation, 1 moves for partial summary judgment, requesting that this Court find that the Hopi Tribe and San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe (“the Paiutes” or “Paiute Tribe”) do not have a claim to lands which the Navajos contend were either purchased by or on behalf of the Navajo Nation or were privately owned lands relinquished pursuant to Section 2 of the 1934 Act. This order will address two…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Chippewa Indians of Minn. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Stewart L. Udall, Secretary of the Interior v. Battle Mountain CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1967
- Roosevelt Savings Bank of City of New York v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1976
- Malanca v. Falstaff Brewing Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- Morelos v. MorelosCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1981
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Masayesva v. ZahCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
- 95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7157, 95 Daily Journal D.A.R. 12,233 Vernon Masayesva, Chairman of the Hopi Tribal Council of the Hopi Indian Tribe, for and on Behalf of the Hopi Indian Tribe v. Peterson Zah, Chairman of the Navajo Tribal Council of the Navajo Indian Tribe, for and on Behalf of the Navajo Indian Tribe, Evelyn James, IntervenorsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995