Seneca Nation of Indians, United States of Am., Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee v. State of New York George E. Pataki, as Governor Joseph Seymour, as Comm'r of the Off. of Gen. Servs. & Bernadette Castro, as Comm'r of Parks, Rec. & Historic Pres., Frederick W. Tapp, Jane E. Schuck, Kent Sandford, Richard J. McCutcheon Beverly A. McCutcheon Albert A. Hoffman, Lucy Hoffman, Myles Barraclough, Sandra Barraclough, Duane G. Glover, Paul H. Geer, Virginia M. Geer, Scott E. Fisher, Rosemary N. Fisher, William E. Campbell, David J. Gibson, Clarence J. Coffman, Jr., C. James Coffman, Sr., Jean Coffman, Eileen W. Garling, Robert F. Van Der Horst, Susan F. Van Der Horst, Joseph Chiapuso, Susan Chiapuso, Howard B. Whitney Est., Deborah Baldwin, Robert L. Jones, Eugenia Jones, Stephen M. Kane, Clarence J. Coffman, Sr., Howard L. Luzier, Florence Luzier, Walter L. Whitney, Louise Hickey, Phillip Confer, Shirley Confer, David C. Williams, & Frances E. Williams, Seneca Nation of Indians, Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians, Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee, United States of Am., on Its Own Behalf, & for the Benefit of the Seneca Nation of Indians & the Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians, Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee v. State of New York, Individually & as a Rep. Class of Landowners Similarly Situated, the New York State Thruway Auth. Erie Cnty. Moore Bus. Forms, Inc., Individually & as a Rep. of a Class of Landowners Similarly Situated Inducom, Inc., Individually & as a Rep. Class of Landowners Similarly Situated Rado-O-Mart, Inc., Individually & as a Rep. Class of Landowners Similarly Situated Ilona H. Lang, Individually & as a Rep. Class of Landowners Similarly Situated Robert W. Weaver, Individually & as a Rep. Class of Landowners Similarly Situated Francis B. Pritchard, George E. Pataki, Bernadette Castro, Ronald W. Coan, John Cahill, Joseph Boardman, John R. Platt, Intervenors-Defendants, 178 F.3d 95 (2d Cir. 1999). · Go Syfert
Search
Seneca Nation of Indians, United States of Am., Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee v. State of New York George E. Pataki, as Governor Joseph Seymour, as Comm'r of the Off. of Gen. Servs. & Bernadette Castro, as Comm'r of Parks, Rec. & Historic Pres., Frederick W. Tapp, Jane E. Schuck, Kent Sandford, Richard J. McCutcheon Beverly A. McCutcheon Albert A. Hoffman, Lucy Hoffman, Myles Barraclough, Sandra Barraclough, Duane G. Glover, Paul H. Geer, Virginia M. Geer, Scott E. Fisher, Rosemary N. Fisher, William E. Campbell, David J. Gibson, Clarence J. Coffman, Jr., C. James Coffman, Sr., Jean Coffman, Eileen W. Garling, Robert F. Van Der Horst, Susan F. Van Der Horst, Joseph Chiapuso, Susan Chiapuso, Howard B. Whitney Est., Deborah Baldwin, Robert L. Jones, Eugenia Jones, Stephen M. Kane, Clarence J. Coffman, Sr., Howard L. Luzier, Florence Luzier, Walter L. Whitney, Louise Hickey, Phillip Confer, Shirley Confer, David C. Williams, & Frances E. Williams, Seneca Nation of Indians, Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians, Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee, United States of Am., on Its Own Behalf, & for the Benefit of the Seneca Nation of Indians & the Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians, Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee v. State of New York, Individually & as a Rep. Class of Landowners Similarly Situated, the New York State Thruway Auth. Erie Cnty. Moore Bus. Forms, Inc., Individually & as a Rep. of a Class of Landowners Similarly Situated Inducom, Inc., Individually & as a Rep. Class of Landowners Similarly Situated Rado-O-Mart, Inc., Individually & as a Rep. Class of Landowners Similarly Situated Ilona H. Lang, Individually & as a Rep. Class of Landowners Similarly Situated Robert W. Weaver, Individually & as a Rep. Class of Landowners Similarly Situated Francis B. Pritchard, George E. Pataki, Bernadette Castro, Ronald W. Coan, John Cahill, Joseph Boardman, John R. Platt, Intervenors-Defendants, 178 F.3d 95 (2d Cir. 1999). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“e note that the state of new york retains its eleventh amendment immunity to the extent that the seneca nation of indians or the tonawanda band of seneca indians raise claims or issues that are not identical to those made by the united states.”
32 citation events (28 in the last 25 years) across 10 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York (nywd, 2003-02-07)
Treatment trajectory · 1999 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1999 2012 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 18 distinct citers. How cited ↗
examined Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York
W.D.N.Y. · 2003 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
e note that the state of new york retains its eleventh amendment immunity to the extent that the seneca nation of indians or the tonawanda band of seneca indians raise claims or issues that are not identical to those made by the united states.
examined Cited as authority (rule) Oneida Indian Nation v. County of Oneida (4×) also: Cited "see"
2d Cir. · 2010 · confidence medium
We again emphasized, however, that "the State of New York retains its Eleventh Amendment immunity to the extent that the [plaintiff Indian tribes] raise claims or issues that are not identical to those made by the United States." Seneca Nation, 178 F.3d at 97 (emphasis added); see also Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York, 26 F.Supp.2d at 560 (noting that the United States' complaint in intervention sought "the identical relief as the Senecas' [complaint]"); accord Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. Minnesota, 124 F.3d 904, 912-13 (8th Cir.1997) (rejecting Minnesota's sovereign immunity de…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Rhode Island v. United States
D.R.I. · 2004 · confidence medium
See Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. Minnesota, 124 F.3d 904, 913 (8th Cir.1997), aff'd. 526 U.S. 172 , 119 S.Ct. 1187 , 143 L.Ed.2d 270 (1999); Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York, 178 F.3d 95, 97 (2nd Cir.1999) (per curiam).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Canadian St. Regis Band of Mohawk Indians Ex Rel. Francis v. New York
N.D.N.Y. · 2003 · confidence medium
Regis IV, 146 F.Supp.2d at 180 (citing Seneca Nation of Indians v. State of New York, 178 F.3d 95, 97 (2d Cir.1999) (per curiam), aff'g, 26 F.Supp.2d 555 (W.D.N.Y.1998); and Arizona v. California, 460 U.S. 605, 614 , 103 S.Ct. 1382, 1388-89 , 75 L.Ed.2d 318 (1983)); see also Oneida Reservation, 194 F.Supp.2d at 129 (citing, inter alia, Oneida Nation of New York v. State of New York, 691 F.2d 1070, 1080 (2d Cir.1982)) 14 (“When litigation is brought by or could have been brought by the [U.S.] on behalf of an Indian Nation and the claims made by the [U.S.] are identical to those made by the In…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Rhode Island Department Of Environmental Management v. United States
1st Cir. · 2002 · confidence medium
See Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. Minnesota, 124 F.3d 904, 913 (8th Cir.1997), aff'd, 526 U.S. 172 , 119 S.Ct. 1187 , 143 L.Ed.2d 270 (1999); Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York, 178 F.3d 95, 97 (2d Cir.1999) (per curiam).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management v. United States
1st Cir. · 2002 · confidence medium
See Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. Minnesota, 124 F.3d 904, 913 (8th Cir.1997), aff 'd, 526 U.S. 172 , 119 S.Ct. 1187 , 143 L.Ed.2d 270 (1999); Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York, 178 F.3d 95, 97 (2d Cir.1999) (per curiam).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Rhode Island Department Of Environmental Management v. United States
1st Cir. · 2002 · confidence medium
See Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. Minnesota, 124 F.3d 904, 913 (8th Cir.1997), aff'd, 528 U.S. 1073 , 120 S.Ct. 785 , 145 L.Ed.2d 662 (2000); Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York, 178 F.3d 95, 97 (2d Cir.1999) (per curiam).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management v. United States
1st Cir. · 2002 · confidence medium
See Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. Minnesota, 124 F.3d 904, 913 (8th Cir.1997), aff'd, 528 U.S. 1073 , 120 S.Ct. 785 , 145 L.Ed.2d 662 (2000); Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York, 178 F.3d 95, 97 (2d Cir.1999) (per curiam).
cited Cited "see" Williams v. Romarm S.A.
D.D.C. · 2020 · signal: see · confidence high
See Nuwesra, 178 F.3d at 95.
cited Cited "see" Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York
2d Cir. · 2004 · signal: see · confidence high
See Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York, 26 F.Supp.2d 555 (W.D.N.Y.1998), aff'd, 178 F.3d 95 , cert. denied sub nom.
discussed Cited "see" Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York
2d Cir. · 2004 · signal: see · confidence high
See Seneca II, 206 F.Supp.2d at 504 . 5 This case was the subject of a prior interlocutory appeal See Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York, 26 F.Supp.2d 555 (W.D.N.Y.1998), aff'd, 178 F.3d 95 , cert. denied sub nom.
cited Cited "see" Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York
W.D.N.Y. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York, 178 F.3d 95 (2d Cir.1999).
discussed Cited "see" Oneida Indian Nation of New York v. New York
N.D.N.Y. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Seneca Nation of Indians v. State of New York, 178 F.3d 95, 97 (2d Cir.1999) (affirming defendants’ Eleventh Amendment immunity defense but noting that New York retains immunity to the extent that the Plaintiffs raise any claims or issues not identical to those made by the United States).
discussed Cited "see" In Re Esmizadeh
Bankr. E.D.N.Y. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Seneca Nation of Indians v. State of New York, 26 F.Supp.2d 555 (W.D.N.Y.1998), aff'd, 178 F.3d 95 (2d Cir.1999), cert. de *387 nied, 528 U.S. 1078 , 120 S.Ct. 785 , 145 L.Ed.2d 662 (2000), citing Bates v. Long Island Railroad Co., 997 F.2d 1028, 1037 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 992 , 114 S.Ct. 550 , 126 L.Ed.2d 452 (1993) (District Court for the Western District of New York found no authority for broadening of the doctrine to include seemingly inconsistent legal positions).
discussed Cited "see" Canadian St. Regis Band of Mohawk Indians v. New York
N.D.N.Y. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See Seneca Nation of Indians v. State of New York, 178 F.3d 95, 97 (2d Cir.1999) (per curiam), aff'g 26 F.Supp.2d 555 (W.D.N.Y.1998), ce rt. denied, 528 U.S. 1073 , 120 S.Ct. 785 , 145 L.Ed.2d 662 (2000); see, e.g., Arizona v. California, 460 U.S. 605, 614 , 103 S.Ct. 1382 , 75 L.Ed.2d 318 (1983) (holding that tribes’ intervention in action brought by United States against states does not violate Eleventh Amendment because “[t]he Tribes do not seek to bring new claims or issues against the states”).
cited Cited "see" Cayuga Indian Nation of New York v. Pataki
N.D.N.Y. · 1999 · signal: see · confidence high
See Cayuga X, 1999 WL 509442 , at *13 (quoting Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York, 26 F.Supp.2d 555, 564 (W.D.N.Y.1998), aff'd 178 F.3d 95 (2d Cir.1999)).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State Of Connecticut Department Of Environmental Protection v. Occupational Safety And Health Administration
2d Cir. · 2004 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. Minnesota, 124 F.3d 904, 912-14 (8th Cir. 1997) (holding that state sovereign immunity did not bar an Indian tribe's action against Minnesota because the United States had intervened and sought the same relief as the tribe) (discussed in Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York, 26 F.Supp.2d 555, 564 (W.D.N.Y.1998), aff'd, 178 F.3d 95 (2d Cir.1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1073 , 120 S.Ct. 785 , 145 L.Ed.2d 662 (2000)). 31 Connecticut's sovereign immunity does not bar OSHA from intervening as a party in a case originally brought by a private citizen…
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection v. Occupational Safety & Health Administration
2d Cir. · 2004 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. Minnesota, 124 F.3d 904, 912-14 (8th Cir. 1997) (holding that state sovereign immunity did not bar an Indian tribe’s action against Minnesota because the United States had intervened and sought the same relief as the tribe) (discussed in Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York, 26 F.Supp.2d 555, 564 (W.D.N.Y.1998), aff'd, 178 F.3d 95 (2d Cir.1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1073 , 120 S.Ct. 785 , 145 L.Ed.2d 662 (2000)).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Seneca Nation of Indians, United States of America, Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee
v.
State of New York George E. Pataki, as Governor Joseph Seymour, as Commissioner of the Office of General Services and Bernadette Castro, as Commissioner of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, Frederick W. Tapp, Jane E. Schuck, Kent Sandford, Richard J. McCutcheon Beverly A. McCutcheon Albert A. Hoffman, Lucy Hoffman, Myles Barraclough, Sandra Barraclough, Duane G. Glover, Paul H. Geer, Virginia M. Geer, Scott E. Fisher, Rosemary N. Fisher, William E. Campbell, David J. Gibson, Clarence J. Coffman, Jr., C. James Coffman, Sr., Jean Coffman, Eileen W. Garling, Robert F. Van Der Horst, Susan F. Van Der Horst, Joseph Chiapuso, Susan Chiapuso, Howard B. Whitney Estate, Deborah Baldwin, Robert L. Jones, Eugenia Jones, Stephen M. Kane, Clarence J. Coffman, Sr., Howard L. Luzier, Florence Luzier, Walter L. Whitney, Louise Hickey, Phillip Confer, Shirley Confer, David C. Williams, and Frances E. Williams, Seneca Nation of Indians, Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians, Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee, United States of America, on Its Own Behalf, and for the Benefit of the Seneca Nation of Indians and the Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians, Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee v. State of New York, Individually and as a Representative Class of Landowners Similarly Situated, the New York State Thruway Authority Erie County Moore Business Forms, Inc., Individually and as a Representative of a Class of Landowners Similarly Situated Inducom, Inc., Individually and as a Representative Class of Landowners Similarly Situated Rado-O-Mart, Inc., Individually and as a Representative Class of Landowners Similarly Situated Ilona H. Lang, Individually and as a Representative Class of Landowners Similarly Situated Robert W. Weaver, Individually and as a Representative Class of Landowners Similarly Situated Francis B. Pritchard, George E. Pataki, Bernadette Castro, Ronald W. Coan, John Cahill, Joseph Boardman, John R. Platt, Intervenors-Defendants
99-6003.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
May 17, 1999.
178 F.3d 95
Cited by 5 opinions  |  Published

178 F.3d 95

SENECA NATION OF INDIANS, Plaintiff-Appellee,
United States of America, Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee,
v.
STATE OF NEW YORK; George E. Pataki, as Governor; Joseph
Seymour, as Commissioner of the Office of General Services;
and Bernadette Castro, as Commissioner of Parks, Recreation
and Historic Preservation, Defendants-Appellants,
Frederick W. Tapp, Jane E. Schuck, Kent Sandford, Richard J.
McCutcheon, Beverly A. McCutcheon, Albert A. Hoffman, Lucy
Hoffman, Myles Barraclough, Sandra Barraclough, Duane G.
Glover, Paul H. Geer, Virginia M. Geer, Scott E. Fisher,
Rosemary N. Fisher, William E. Campbell, David J. Gibson,
Clarence J. Coffman, Jr., C. James Coffman, Sr., Jean
Coffman, Eileen W. Garling, Robert F. Van Der Horst, Susan
F. Van Der Horst, Joseph Chiapuso, Susan Chiapuso, Howard B.
Whitney Estate, Deborah Baldwin, Robert L. Jones, Eugenia
Jones, Stephen M. Kane, Clarence J. Coffman, Sr., Howard L.
Luzier, Florence Luzier, Walter L. Whitney, Executor, Louise
Hickey, Phillip Confer, Shirley Confer, David C. Williams,
and Frances E. Williams, Defendants.
Seneca Nation of Indians, Plaintiff-Appellee,
Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians, Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee,
United States of America, on its own behalf, and for the
benefit of the Seneca Nation of Indians and the
Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians,
Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee,
v.
State of New York, Individually and as a representative
class of landowners similarly situated, Defendant-Appellant,
The New York State Thruway Authority; Erie County; Moore
Business Forms, Inc., Individually and as a representative
of a class of landowners similarly situated; Inducom, Inc.,
Individually and as a representative class of landowners
similarly situated; Rado-O-Mart, Inc., Individually and as a
representative class of landowners similarly situated; Ilona
H. Lang, Individually and as a representative class of
landowners similarly situated; Robert W. Weaver,
Individually and as a representative class of landowners
similarly situated; Francis B. Pritchard, Defendants,
George E. Pataki, Bernadette Castro, Ronald W. Coan, John
Cahill, Joseph Boardman, John R. Platt,
Intervenors-Defendants.

Docket Nos. 99-6003, 99-6005.

United States Court of Appeals,
Second Circuit.

Argued April 26, 1999.
Decided May 17, 1999.

Andrew D. Bing, Assistant Attorney General (Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General of the State of New York; Peter H. Schiff, Acting Solicitor General; Nancy A. Spiegel, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel), Albany, New York, for Defendants-Appellants.

Jeanne S. Whiteing, Whiteing & Smith (Robert P. Isaac, Jr., Deputy Attorney General, Seneca Nation Department of Justice, Salamanca, New York; Arlinda F. Locklear, Jefferson, Maryland, of counsel), Boulder, Colorado, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Samuel C. Alexander, Attorney, Environment & Natural Resources Division, U.S. Department of Justice (Lois J. Schiffer, Assistant Attorney General, Environment & Natural Resources Division, United States Department of Justice; David C. Shilton, Attorney, of counsel), Washington, D.C., for Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee United States of America.

Steven M. Tullberg, Indian Law Resource Center (June L. Lorenzo and Alexandra Page, of counsel), Washington, D.C., for Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians.

Before: WINTER, Chief Judge, MINER, and POOLER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

We affirm the orders of the district court denying the State of New York's Eleventh Amendment defenses for substantially the reasons stated by Judge Curtin in the decision below. See Seneca Nation of Indians v. State of New York, 26 F.Supp.2d 555, 563-65 (W.D.N.Y.1998). In doing so, we note that the State of New York retains its Eleventh Amendment immunity to the extent that the Seneca Nation of Indians or the Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians raise claims or issues that are not identical to those made by the United States. See Arizona v. California, 460 U.S. 605, 614, 103 S.Ct. 1382, 75 L.Ed.2d 318 (1983) (holding that granting tribes leave to intervene in suit commenced by United States against states does not violate Eleventh Amendment because "[t]he Tribes do not seek to bring new claims or issues against the states").