Legal Opinion

Lundgren v. Upper Skagit Indian Tribe

Washington Supreme Court

Decided February 16, 2017No. 91622-5PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

[As amended by order of the Supreme Court June 8, 2017.]

Johnson, J.

¶1 This case involves the relationship between in rem jurisdiction, Superior Court Civil Rule (CR) 19, and sovereign immunity. The issue is whether the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe’s (Tribe) assertion of sovereign immunity requires dismissal of an in rem adverse possession action to quiet title to a disputed strip of land on the boundary of property purchased by the Tribe. The superior court concluded that because it had in rem jurisdiction, it could determine ownership of the land without the Tribe’s participation. An inquiry…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. County of Yakima v. Confederated Tribes & Bands of the Yakima Indian NationSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  2. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Peabody Western Coal CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
  3. Chaplin v. SandersWashington Supreme Court · 1984
  4. Crosby v. Spokane CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1999
  5. Gildon v. Simon Property Group, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2006

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Upper Skagit Tribe v. LundgrenSupreme Court of the United States · 2018
  2. Flying T Ranch, Inc. v. Stillaguamish Tribe of IndiansWashington Supreme Court · 2025
  3. State Of Washington v. Evergreen Freedom FoundationCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2017

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API