Legal Opinion · Dissent

In Re 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984 & 1985 Delinquent Property Taxes Owed to the City of Nome

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided September 22, 1989No. S-2651Published

1DissentRabino Witz, Justice

I dissent from the court’s holding that section 16 of the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA), 25 U.S.C. § 476, bars the City of Nome from foreclosing on the three lots owned by the Nome Eskimo Community.

*369As this court noted in Native Village of Stevens v. Alaska Management & Planning, 757 P.2d 32, 39-40 (Alaska 1988):

When the IRA was initially passed in 1934, section 16 but not section 17 was applicable to Alaska. Since section 16 was limited to a tribe or tribes residing on a reservation and Alaska had few reservations, its applicability was quite limited. This was changed by the Alaska Indian…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. State v. AlexAlaska Supreme Court · 1982
  2. City & Borough of Juneau v. ThibodeauAlaska Supreme Court · 1979
  3. Poulin v. ZartmanAlaska Supreme Court · 1975
  4. North Slope Borough v. Sohio Petroleum Corp.Alaska Supreme Court · 1978
  5. United States v. United States Steel CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1973

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

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

Powered by the Exa API