25 U.S.C. § 416

Leases of trust or restricted lands on San Xavier and Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Reservations for public, religious, educational, recreational, residential, business, farming or grazing purposes

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

Any trust or restricted Indian lands, whether tribally or individually owned, located on the San Xavier Indian Reservation and the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Reservation, in the State of Arizona, may be leased by the Indian owners, with the approval of the Secretary of the Interior, for public, religious, educational, recreational, residential, business, farming or grazing purposes, including the development or utilization of natural resources in connection with operations under such leases, but no lease shall be executed under sections 416 to 416j of this title for purposes that are subject to the laws governing mining leases on Indian lands. The term of a grazing lease shall not exceed ten years, the term of a farming lease that does not require the making of a substantial investment in the improvement of the land shall not exceed ten years, and the term of a farming lease that requires the making of a substantial investment in the improvement of the land shall not exceed forty years. The term of any other lease shall not exceed ninety-nine years. No lease shall contain an option to renew which, if exercised, will extend the total term beyond the maximum term permitted by sections 416 to 416j of this title. The Secretary of the Interior shall not approve any lease with a term that is longer than is necessary in his judgment to obtain maximum economic benefits for the Indian owners.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases, 1972–2011 · leading case: San Xavier Dev. Auth. v. Susan Charles, A.K.A. Susan Charet D.B.A. Desert Sands Mobile Home Sales & Serv., 237 F.3d 1149 (9th Cir. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

San Xavier Dev. Auth. v. Susan Charles, A.K.A. Susan Charet D.B.A. Desert Sands Mobile Home Sales & Serv., 237 F.3d 1149 (9th Cir. 2001). · cites it 5× “§ 348 ; and the provision of Title 25 which authorizes leases of property within the San Xavier Indian Reservation, 25 U.S.C. § 416 . The complaint also alleged that the sublease was invalid because the Master Lease required subleases to be approved by the BIA, and the BIA never…”

K2 Am. Corp. v. Roland Oil & Gas, LLC, 653 F.3d 1024 (9th Cir. 2011). “Oneida I and Taylor "stand for the principle that a plaintiff asserting a right to possession of allotted land cannot rest its right to relief (or its basis for federal jurisdiction) on the bare fact that one of the parties to it has derived its title under an act of Congress…”

Hollywood Mobile Estates Ltd. v. Seminole Tribe, 641 F.3d 1259 (11th Cir. 2011). “Section 415 and its accompanying regulations protect Indian landowners, not nontribal lessees.”

Nulankeyutmonen Nkihtaqmikon v. Impson, 503 F.3d 18 (1st Cir. 2007). “2002) (referring to 25 U.S.C. § 416 , an analog to § 415), and to ensure that the parties to the lease have adequately considered its impacts.”

Agua Caliente Band of Mission Indians' Tribal Council v. City of Palm Springs, 347 F. Supp. 42 (C.D. Cal. 1972). “1112, ( 25 U.S.C. §§ 416 -416j) concerning the leasing of land on the San Xavier and Salt River Pina-Maricopa Indian Reservations in Arizona.”

Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. Sun Prairie, 286 F.3d 1031 (8th Cir. 2002). “Because the statutes relied upon by Sun Prairie were enacted to protect Indian interests, we believe it would be inconsistent to interpret them as giving legally enforceable rights to non-tribal or non-governmental parties whose interests conflict with the tribes’ interests.”

Hollywood Mobile Estates Ltd. v. Seminole Tribe (11th Cir. 2011). “3d at 1153 (lessee of Indian land lacked prudential standing to sue under 25 U.S.C. § 416 , a related statute that governs leases of land located within the San Xavier Indian Reservation, because the statute and accompanying regulations did not provide a remedy for the lessee).”

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.