25 U.S.C. § 85
Contracts relating to tribal funds or property
No contract made with any Indian, where such contract relates to the tribal funds or property in the hands of the United States, shall be valid, nor shall any payment for services rendered in relation thereto be made unless the consent of the United States has previously been given.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases, 1993–1999 · leading case: Western Shoshone Business Council ex rel. Western Shoshone Tribe of the Duck Valley Reservation v. Babbitt
Western Shoshone Business Council ex rel. Western Shoshone Tribe of the Duck Valley Reservation v. Babbitt (1993)
“After final judgment was entered, plaintiffs sought to amend their complaint to require the Secretary of the Interior to place the Western Shoshones on the list of recognized tribes, and to add an individual Indian plaintiff and allege a claim under 25 U.S.C. § 85 . 6 Once final…”
Heller, Ehrman, White & MacAuliffe v. Bruce Babbitt, Secretary of the Interior of the United States (1993)
“” The contract was approved by the Secretary of the BIA as required by 25 U.S.C. § 85 . In 1973, ten years after the initiation of the lawsuit, the Claims Court held that the Short plaintiffs were entitled to damages stemming from BIA’s improper distribution of Reservation…”
Landmark Golf Ltd. Partnership v. Las Vegas Paiute Tribe (1999)
“Landmark’s First Amended Complaint also asserts a cause of action under 25 U.S.C. § 85 . That section provides: "No contract made with any Indian, where such contract relates to the tribal funds or property in the hands of the United States, shall be valid, nor shall any payment…”
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.