TIMBISHA SHOSHONE TRIBE v. Kennedy
District Court, E.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AND REMAND (Doe. 51) and DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO AMEND BY SUBSTITUTION (Doc. 54)
LAWRENCE J. O’NEILL, District Judge.
Introduction
The Court must determine whether it has federal subject matter jurisdiction over claims that, while based on state and tribal law, rely on decisions of the United States Department of Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs (“BIA”). As set forth below, subject matter jurisdiction exists if the well-pleaded complaint establishes either: (1) federal law creates a cause of action; or (2) the plaintiffs right to relief necessarily depends…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Caterpillar Inc. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Christianson v. Colt Industries Operating Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Thompson Ex Rel. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Santa Clara Pueblo v. MartinezSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Baggett v. Merced Police Dept.District Court, E.D. California · 2024