25 U.S.C. § 731
Omitted
[omitted]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1999–2021 · leading case: State of Texas v. Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of TX
State of Texas v. Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of TX (2019)
“Code was updated while this case was pending in district court and now omits the Restoration Act, which was previously codified at 25 U.S.C. § 731 et seq. Though no longer codified, the Restoration Act is still in effect.”
State v. Ala. Coushatta Tribe of Tex. (2018)
“, apply to the Tribe, as the NIGC's October 2015 letter concluded, or does the Tribe's Restoration Act control, 25 U.S.C. §§ 731 - 737, as the State argues? Second, if IGRA controls, do the operations at Naskila consist of "Class II" gaming? Both parties submit evidentiary…”
Comstock Oil & Gas, Inc. v. Alabama & Coushatta Indian Tribes of Texas (1999)
“See 25 U.S.C. §§ 731 (5), 734(b). In addition, the code provides a procedure through which amendments may be made to the constitution through elections called by the Secretary of the Interior.”
Tribal Smokeshop, Inc v. Alabama-Coushatta Tribes Ex Rel. Tribal Council (1999)
“1 Plaintiffs seek monetary damages only for breach of contract and conversion claims against the tribe and the tribal council individually.”
State of Texas v. Alabama-Coushatta (2021)
“and 25 U.S.C.S. § 731 et seq., Pub. L. No. 100-89, 101 Stat.”
AL Coushatta Tribe v. State of Texas (2003)
“(regarding the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo), and 25 U.S.C. §§ 731 et. seq. (regarding the Alabama-Coushatta), which restored the trust relationship between the federal government and the tribes.”
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.