Legal Opinion
Doe v. Mann
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided July 18, 2005No. 04-15477PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
McKEOWN, Circuit Judge.
Mary Doe 1 challenges the State of California’s jurisdiction to terminate her parental rights over her Indian child, Jane Doe, who was domiciled on the Elem Indian Colony reservation at the time she was removed from Mary Doe’s custody by the Lake County Department of Social Services. The case arises under the Indian Child Welfare Act (“ICWA”), which was passed in 1978 to ensure the tribes a role in adjudicating child custody proceedings involving Indian children. P.L, 95-608, codified at 25 U.S.C. §§ 1901-1963. 2 ICWA provides that tribes will have exclusive…
2Cases cited51 opinions
- District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. FeldmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Califano v. SandersSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Food & Drug Administration v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Doe v. MannCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005