Anderson & Middleton Lumber Co. v. Quinault Indian Nation (1996)
green
· 63 citation events
across 6 courts.
Showing the 11 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1996 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
199620112026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
Lundgren v. Upper Skagit Indian Tribe (2017)
An action for partition of real property is a proceeding in rem." Anderson, 130 Wn.2d at 872, 873 .
green
Lundgren v. Upper Skagit Indian Tribe (2017)
An action for partition of real property is a proceeding in rem." Anderson, 130 Wn.2d at 872, 873 .
green
Lundgren v. Upper Skagit Indian Tribe (2017)
An action for partition of real property is a pro ceeding in rem ” Anderson, 130 Wn.2d at 872, 873 .
green
Smale v. Noretep (2009)
RCW 7.28.010 (“Any person having a valid subsisting interest in real property, and a right to the possession thereof, may recover the same by action in the superior court of the proper county.”). 130 Wn.2d at 872-73 (“[Anderson & Middletonl’s action in this case involves no taking of property.
green
Oneida Tribe of Indians v. Village of Hobart (2008)
See Anderson & Middleton Lumber Co. v. Quinault Indian Nation, 130 Wash.2d 862 , 929 P.2d 379, 387-88 (1996) (“Reacquisition of the land by the Nation does not change this result since ‘parcels of [Indian] land approved for alienation by *933 the federal government and then reacquired by the Tribe [do] not then become inalienable by operation of the Nonintercourse Act.’ ”) (quoting Lummi, 5 F.3d at 1359 ); Bay Mills Indian Community v. Michigan, 244 Mich.App. 739 , 626 N.W.2…
“Reacquisition of the land by the Nation does not change this result since ‘parcels of [Indian] land approved for alienation by *933 the federal government and then reacquired by the Tribe [do] not then become inalienable by operation of the Nonintercourse Act.’ ”
green
Smale v. Noretep (2009)
See Pennhurst State Sch. & Hosp. v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89, 100 , 104 S.Ct. 900 , 79 L.Ed.2d 67 (1984). [23] 209 U.S. 123 , 28 S.Ct. 441 , 52 L.Ed. 714 (1908). [24] Coeur d'Alene Tribe of Idaho, 521 U.S. at 282 , 117 S.Ct. 2028 ; see also Pennhurst, 465 U.S. at 101 , 104 S.Ct. 900 . [25] "[T]he prohibition placed on the power of the federal judiciary by the [E]leventh [A]mendment exceeds the common law doctrine of sovereign immunity." Aquilar v. Kleppe, 424 F.Supp. 433, 436 …
green
Matheson v. Gregoire (2007)
See Anderson & Middleton Lumber Co. v. Quinault Indian Nation, 130 Wn.2d 862, 876 , 929 P.2d 379 (1996). ¶17 Under federal law, tribal sovereign immunity comprehensively protects recognized American Indian tribes from suit absent explicit and “unequivocal” waiver or abrogation.
green
Matheson v. Gregoire (2007)
See Anderson & Middleton Lumber Co. v. Quinault Indian Nation, 130 Wash.2d 862, 876 , 929 P.2d 379 (1996). ¶ 17 Under federal law, tribal sovereign immunity comprehensively protects recognized American Indian tribes from suit absent explicit and "unequivocal" waiver or abrogation.
green
Wright v. Colville Tribal Enterprise Corp. (2006)
See Anderson & Middleton Lumber Co. v. Quinault Indian Nation, 130 Wn.2d 862, 876 , 929 P.2d 379 (1996).
green
Wright v. Colville Tribal Enterprise Corp. (2006)
See Anderson & Middleton Lumber Co. v. Quinault Indian Nation, 130 Wash.2d 862, 876 , 929 P.2d 379 (1996).
green
Friend v. Friend (1998)
See Anderson & Middleton Lumber Co. v. Quinault Indian Nation, 130 Wn.2d 862, 873 , 929 P.2d 379 (1996) (citing Hamilton v. Johnson, 137 Wash. 92, 100 , 241 P. 672 (1925)); Cummings v. Anderson, 94 Wn.2d 135, 143 , 614 P.2d 1283 (1980).
citing Hamilton v. Johnson, 137 Wash. 92, 100 , 241 P. 672 (1925)