No grant of a right-of-way over and across any lands belonging to a tribe organized under the Act of June 18, 1934 (48 Stat. 984), as amended [25 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.]; the Act of May 1, 1936 (49 Stat. 1250); or the Act of June 26, 1936 (49 Stat. 1967), shall be made without the consent of the proper tribal officials. Rights-of-way over and across lands of individual Indians may be granted without the consent of the individual Indian owners if (1) the land is owned by more than one person, and the owners or owner of a majority of the interests therein consent to the grant; (2) the whereabouts of the owner of the land or an interest therein are unknown, and the owners or owner of any interests therein whose whereabouts are known, or a majority thereof, consent to the grant; (3) the heirs or devisees of a deceased owner of the land or an interest therein have not been determined, and the Secretary of the Interior finds that the grant will cause no substantial injury to the land or any owner thereof; or (4) the owners of interests in the land are so numerous that the Secretary finds it would be impracticable to obtain their consent, and also finds that the grant will cause no substantial injury to the land or any owner thereof.
Notes of Decisions
Oneida Tribe of Indians v. Vill. of Hobart, 542 F. Supp. 2d 908 (E.D. Wis. 2008).
· cites it 3× “” 25 U.S.C. § 324 . Based on the plain language of § 476(e), as confirmed by the 1948 Act, the Tribe argues that no disposition of its property, including by condemnation, can occur without its consent.”
JoAnn Chase v. Andeavor Logistics, L.P., 12 F.4th 864 (8th Cir. 2021).
· cites it 2× “25 U.S.C. § 324 . The pipeline began operating in 1953 after the BIA (to which the Secretary has delegated this authority) granted Andeavor’s predecessor a twenty-year right-of-way.”
Begay v. Pub. Serv. Co. of NM, 710 F. Supp. 2d 1161 (D.N.M. 2010).
“3 , 25 U.S.C. § 324 sets forth the instances when consent of the owner or owners is not required.”
Swift Transp., Inc. v. John, 546 F. Supp. 1185 (D. Ariz. 1982).
“25 U.S.C. § 324 ; 25 C.F.R. § 161.3 . Plaintiffs assert without contradiction that consent was obtained in this case.”
Blackfeet Indian Tribe v. Montana Power Co., 838 F.2d 1055 (9th Cir. 1988).
· cites it 2× “” 25 U.S.C. § 324 , 62 Stat. 18 . Additionally, the 1948 Act provided that: “Sections 323 and 328 of this title shall not in any manner amend or repeal the provisions of the Federal Water Power Act, .”
Brown v. United States, 86 F.3d 1554 (Fed. Cir. 1996).
“25 U.S.C. § 324 provides that the Secretary-may grant rights-of-way without the consent of individual Indian owners if: 1) the owners are so numerous that it would be impracticable to obtain their consent and the grant will cause no substantial injury to the land or any owner;…”
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.