25 U.S.C. § 487
Omitted
[omitted]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases, 1981–2007 · leading case: Osborn v. Haley
Osborn v. Haley (2007)
“§ 1441a( l )(3)(C) ("The Corporation may appeal any order of remand entered by a United States district court"); § 1819(b)(2)(C) (same); 25 U.S.C. § 487 (d) ("[T]he United States shall have the right to appeal from any order of remand in the case").”
Powerex Corp. v. Reliant Energy Services, Inc. (2007)
“§ 1441a( l )(3)(c), § 1819(b)(2)(C); 25 U.S.C. § 487 (d). We are well aware that § 1447(d)'s immunization of erroneous remands has undesirable consequences in the FSIA context.”
Kircher v. Putnam Funds Trust (2006)
“§ 1441a( l )(3)(C); § 1819(b)(2)(C); 25 U. S. C. § 487 (d); cf. n. 7, supra. There is no such "clear statutory command" here, and that silence tells us we must look to 28 U.”
United States of America, and Spokane Tribe of Indians, Plaintiff-In-Intervention-Appellant v. Barbara J. Anderson, Jame (1984)
“174 , codified as amended at 25 U.S.C. § 487 . This vacillation of land ownership provides a framework for the instant controversy.”
Nicholas Nasuti v. James Scannell (1986)
“Similar exceptions are provided for review of a remand order in cases affecting land of the Spokane Tribe, 25 U.S.C. § 487 (d) (1982); the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community, 25 U.”
United States v. Ferry County (1981)
“§ 610 -e (1968) (hereinafter the “Swinomish Act”); and 25 U.S.C. § 487 (the Act of June 10, 1968,- 82 Stat.”
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.