C.F.R. » Title 25 » CHAPTER I—BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR › SUBCHAPTER D—HUMAN SERVICES › PART 23—INDIAN CHILD WELFARE ACT › Subpart I—Indian Child Welfare Act Proceedings

25 C.F.R. § 23.110

When must a State court dismiss an action?

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

Subject to 25 U.S.C. 1919 (Agreements between States and Indian Tribes) and § 23.113 (emergency proceedings), the following limitations on a State court's jurisdiction apply:

(a) The court in any voluntary or involuntary child-custody proceeding involving an Indian child must determine the residence and domicile of the Indian child. If either the residence or domicile is on a reservation where the Tribe exercises exclusive jurisdiction over child-custody proceedings, the State court must expeditiously notify the Tribal court of the pending dismissal based on the Tribe's exclusive jurisdiction, dismiss the State-court child-custody proceeding, and ensure that the Tribal court is sent all information regarding the Indian child-custody proceeding, including, but not limited to, the pleadings and any court record.

(b) If the child is a ward of a Tribal court, the State court must expeditiously notify the Tribal court of the pending dismissal, dismiss the State-court child-custody proceeding, and ensure that the Tribal court is sent all information regarding the Indian child-custody proceeding, including, but not limited to, the pleadings and any court record.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2018–2024 · leading case: Brackeen v. Zinke, 338 F. Supp. 3d 514 (N.D. Tex. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Brackeen v. Zinke, 338 F. Supp. 3d 514 (N.D. Tex. 2018). “25 C.F.R. § 23.110 (a). The Final Rule requires state courts to terminate child custody proceedings if any party or the state court has reason to believe that the Indian child was improperly removed from the custody of his parent or Indian custodian.”
In re D.M. (Cal. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 2× “§§ 1912 (d)-(f), 1915, 1916, 1920, 1922; 25 C.F.R. §§ 23.110 , 23.113, 23.114, 23.”
In re Samantha F. (Cal. Ct. App. 2024). “113 (2023)), with different findings required if it were a child-custody proceeding ( 25 C.F.R. §§ 23.110 , 23.120 (2023)). Warrant or not, a court must make these findings.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.