Legal Opinion
Cobell v. Kempthorne
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided January 30, 2008No. Civil Action 96-1285 (JR)PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
JAMES ROBERTSON, District Judge.
These findings and conclusions are the result of a 10-day bench trial in October 2007. The central purpose of the trial was to determine whether the Department of Interior has remedied or is remedying what Judge Lamberth found in Cobell v. Babbitt, 91 F.Supp.2d 1, 58 (D.D.C.1999) (Cobell V), aff'd, Cobell v. Norton, 240 F.3d 1081 (D.C.Cir.2001) (Cobell VI), to be a breach of its duty under the Indian Trust Fund Management Reform Act of 1994 to produce an accounting for Individual Indian Money (IIM) account holders. In…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Bennett v. SpearSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- United States v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Norton v. Southern Utah Wilderness AllianceSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Bowen v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- United States v. KagamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Elouise Cobell v. Sally JewellCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2015
- Cobell v. SalazarCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2012
- Cobell v. SalazarCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2009
- Fletcher v. United StatesDistrict Court, N.D. Oklahoma · 2015
- Cobell v. KempthorneDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2008
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.