Legal Opinion
Te-Moak Bands of Western Shoshone Indians of Nevada v. United States
United States Court of Claims
Decided September 18, 1989No. 326-APublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
SMITH, Chief Judge.
This action concerns a motion to intervene by three Indian tribes: The Timbisha Shoshones, the Duckwater Shoshones, and the Yomba Shoshones. These tribes allege that their interests in the case at bar are not adequately represented by the Te-Moak Bands of Western Shoshone Indians. Defendant objects to this motion for intervention; therefore, this motion is made under Rule 24(a) of the Rules of the United States Claims Court (RUSCC) as a matter of right. For the reasons set forth below, the court must deny the motion for intervention.1
FACTS
The history of this case began…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Trbovich v. United Mine WorkersSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- National Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- William E. Nuesse, Commissioner of Banks, State of Wisconsin v. William Camp, Comptroller of the CurrencyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1967
- 17 Fair empl.prac.cas. 528, 14 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 7813 Eddie Stallworth v. Monsanto Company v. J. W. Palmer, Movants-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1977
- Terry v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- John R. Sand & Gravel Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2004
- Osage Tribe v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2008
- Chippewa Cree Tribe of Rocky Boy's Reservation v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009
- Western Shoshone National Council v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
- Western Shoshone National Council v. United StatesDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2004
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.