The purpose of this part is to implement provisions of the Act of December 22, 1974 (Pub. L. 93-531, 88 Stat. 1712 as amended by Pub. L. 96-305, 94 Stat. 929), hereinafter referred to as the Act, in accordance with the following objectives—
(a) To insure that persons displaced as a result of the Act are treated fairly, consistently, and equitably so that these persons will not suffer the disproportionate adverse, social, economic, cultural and other impacts of relocation.
(b) To set forth the regulations and procedures by which the Commission shall operate; and implement the provisions of the Act.
(c) To establish standards consistent with those established in the implementation of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (84 Stat. 1894, 42 U.S.C. 4601 et. seq., Pub. L. 91-646), hereinafter referred to as the Uniform Act.
(d) To insure that owners of habitations and other improvements to be acquired pursuant to the Act are treated fairly and consistently, to encourage and expedite acquisition by agreements with such owners, to minimize litigation, relieve congestion in the courts and to promote public confidence in the Commission's relocation program.
(e) To facilitate development of a relocation plan according to the Act and carry out the directed relocation as promptly and fairly as possible, with a minimum of hardship and discomfort to the relocation, in accordance with the Act.
Notes of Decisions
Begay v. Off. of Navajo & Hopi Indian Relocation, 305 F. Supp. 3d 1040 (D. Ariz. 2018).
“" 25 C.F.R. § 700.1 . The purpose of the Settlement Act, however, does not require that each applicant be granted relocation benefits without satisfying the Act's criteria.”
Manygoats v. Off. of Navajo & Hopi Indian Relocation, 735 F. Supp. 949 (D. Ariz. 1990).
“The NHIRC is assisted by the regulations found in the Code of Federal Regulations at 25 C.F.R. § 700.1 et seq. (1989). Pertinent portions of this regulation follow: § 700.”
Shirley v. Off. of Navajo & Hopi Indian Relocation (D. Ariz. 2024).
“20 at 12) In doing so, Plaintiff 17 argues that the IHO violated 25 C.F.R. §700.1 (a), which requires ONHIR “to insure that 18 persons displaced as a result of the [Settlement] Act are treated fairly, consistently, and 19 equitably so that these persons will not suffer the…”
Manley Barton v. Off. of Navajo & Hopi Indian Relocation (9th Cir. 2025).
“See 25 C.F.R. § 700.1 (1988). To be eligible for benefits, an applicant had to show that he (1) was a resident of the land partitioned to the tribe of which he was not a member on December 22, 1974, and (2) was head of household as of the date he moved away from the land…”
Yazzie v. Yazzie, 8 Navajo Rptr. 41 (2000).
“25 C.F.R. § 700.1 (2000). *49 The relocation benefits were thus specifically intended to support the families and individuals being relocated.”
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.