Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Ryan Harvey, Rocks Off, Inc. v. Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah

Utah Supreme Court

Decided November 7, 2017No. Case No. 20160362Published

1ConcurrenceJustice Himonas

*428¶82 I concur in Justice Durham's opinion without reservation. I write separately to more fully explain why, in my view, the tribe is not a necessary party under rule 19(a) of the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure and to offer some practical guidance to the district courts on how to manage a dual-capacity suit like this one. I also write separately to lay out why I believe the tribal exhaustion doctrine applies to state courts and why it is a rule of exhaustion and not abstention. Last, I write separately to identify a jurisdictional issue the district court and the parties should take up on…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Kentucky v. GrahamSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. Ex Parte YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
  3. Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  4. Piper Aircraft Co. v. ReynoSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  5. Hafer v. MeloSupreme Court of the United States · 1991

29 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