25 U.S.C. § 1774a

Omitted

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 25 CasesGoogle Scholar

[omitted]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1994–2007 · leading case: Citizens Agaist Cas. Gam., Erie Cty. v. Kempthorne, 471 F. Supp. 2d 295 (W.D.N.Y. 2007).
Citizens Agaist Cas. Gam., Erie Cty. v. Kempthorne, 471 F. Supp. 2d 295 (W.D.N.Y. 2007). “25 U.S.C. § 1774a(7). [5] Though not expressly' articulated in the SNSA, the potential liability of concern to the United States presumably involved a possible violation of its trust obligation to the SNI by authorizing contractual agreements and/or a settlement for…”
Fluent v. Salamanca Indian Lease Auth., 847 F. Supp. 1046 (W.D.N.Y. 1994). “” 25 U.S.C. § 1774a(2). Contrary to Plaintiffs’ argument, the 1990 Act does not place any obligation on the Nation to negotiate new or renewed lease terms with individual lessees, other than the 40/40 lease referred to as the “Agreement.”
Citizens against Casino Gambling v. Kempthorne, 471 F. Supp. 2d 295 (W.D.N.Y. 2007). “25 U.S.C. § 1774a(7). . Though not expressly articulated in the SNSA, the potential liability of concern to the United States presumably involved a possible violation of its trust obligation to the SNI by authorizing contractual agreements and/or a settlement for significantly…”
— 25 U.S.C. § 1774a(2) — 1 case
Fluent v. Salamanca Indian Lease Auth., 847 F. Supp. 1046 (W.D.N.Y. 1994). “” 25 U.S.C. § 1774a(2). Contrary to Plaintiffs’ argument, the 1990 Act does not place any obligation on the Nation to negotiate new or renewed lease terms with individual lessees, other than the 40/40 lease referred to as the “Agreement.”
— 25 U.S.C. § 1774a(7) — 2 cases
Citizens Agaist Cas. Gam., Erie Cty. v. Kempthorne, 471 F. Supp. 2d 295 (W.D.N.Y. 2007). “25 U.S.C. § 1774a(7). [5] Though not expressly' articulated in the SNSA, the potential liability of concern to the United States presumably involved a possible violation of its trust obligation to the SNI by authorizing contractual agreements and/or a settlement for…”
Citizens against Casino Gambling v. Kempthorne, 471 F. Supp. 2d 295 (W.D.N.Y. 2007). “25 U.S.C. § 1774a(7). . Though not expressly articulated in the SNSA, the potential liability of concern to the United States presumably involved a possible violation of its trust obligation to the SNI by authorizing contractual agreements and/or a settlement for significantly…”
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.