25 U.S.C. § 1300j
Omitted
[omitted]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 1997–2006 · leading case: TOMAC v. Norton, Gale A., 433 F.3d 852 (D.C. Cir. 2006).
TOMAC v. Norton, Gale A., 433 F.3d 852 (D.C. Cir. 2006). “See 25 U.S.C. § 1300j (2000); S. Rep. NO. 103-266, at 1 (1994).”
Tomac v. Norton, 193 F. Supp. 2d 182 (D.D.C. 2002). “25 U.S.C. §§ 1300j et seq. As an economic development project to fund further land purchases and tribal services, the Band now plans to build a 400,000 square foot complex that will include a 24r-hour-a-day casino, a large hotel, a child care facility, and several restaurants…”
Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians v. United States, 78 F. Supp. 2d 699 (W.D. Mich. 1999). “103-323 (S1066), entitled “An Act to Restore Federal Services to the Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians” (codified at 25 U.S.C. § 1300j et seq.). Through this act to “restore” federal services, Congress affirmed recognition of the Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians, a tribe…”
United States v. Ross Allen Doherty, 126 F.3d 769 (6th Cir. 1997). “IV The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. . Its members are descendants of the Polawatomi Indians, whose status as a sovereign nation has been acknowledged by the federal government in numerous treaties.”
— 25 U.S.C. § 1300j(6) — 1 case
Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians v. United States, 78 F. Supp. 2d 699 (W.D. Mich. 1999). “103-323 (S1066), entitled “An Act to Restore Federal Services to the Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians” (codified at 25 U.S.C. § 1300j et seq.). Through this act to “restore” federal services, Congress affirmed recognition of the Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians, a tribe…”
— 25 U.S.C. § 1300j(l) — 1 case
United States v. Ross Allen Doherty, 126 F.3d 769 (6th Cir. 1997). “IV The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. . Its members are descendants of the Polawatomi Indians, whose status as a sovereign nation has been acknowledged by the federal government in numerous treaties.”
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.