Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Strate Vs. A-1 Contractors

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Apr 28, 1997

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

52 entries 3 linked 49 unlinked
Show
  1. Morris Vs. Hitchcock US Supreme Court · May 16, 1904
  2. Thomas Vs. Gay US Supreme Court · Feb 21, 1898
  3. South Dakota Vs. Bourland US Supreme Court · Jun 14, 1993
  4. Strate v. A-1
    Search
  5. Associate Tribal Judge, Tribal Court of the Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation, Et Al. V. a-L
    Search
  6. an injunction against further Tribal Court proceedings. Relying particularly on National Farmers Union Ins. Coso v. Crow
    Search
  7. Tribe, 471 U. S. 845 , and Iowa Mut. Ins. Co. v. LaPlante
    Search
  8. The 439 en banc Eighth Circuit reversed, concluding that the controlling precedent was Montana v. United
    Search
  9. statute or treaty, tribal jurisdiction over nonmembers' conduct exists only in limited circumstances. In Oliphant v. Suquamish
    Search
  10. U. S. 191 , the Court held that tribes lack criminal jurisdiction over non-Indians. Later, in Montana v. United
    Search
  11. Tribes and their members. Petitioners are correct that Montana and the cases following its instruction-Brendale v. Confederated
    Search
  12. Tribes and Bands of Yakima Nation, 492 U. S. 408 , and South Dakota v. Bourland
    Search
  13. the conduct at issue in the cases cited by Montana, id., at 565-566, as fitting within the exception, Williams v. Lee
    Search
  14. Buster v. Wright
    Search
  15. and Washington v. Confederated
    Search
  16. whether a State's (or Territory's) exercise of authority would trench unduly on tribal self-government. Fisher v. District
    Search
  17. Montana Catholic Missions v. Missoula
    Search
  18. and Thomas v. Gay
    Search
  19. for the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux (Dakota) Community et al. by Kurt V. BlueDog
    Search
  20. Court. See id., at 41-45. Relying particularly on this Court's decisions in National Farmers Union Ins. Coso v. Crow
    Search
  21. Tribe, 471 U. S. 845 (1985), and Iowa Mut. Ins. Co. v. LaPlante
    Search
  22. is here at issue. 445 76 F.3d 930 (1996). The Court of Appeals concluded that our decision in Montana v. United
    Search
  23. or treaty, tribal jurisdiction over the conduct of nonmembers exists only in limited circumstances. In Oliphant v. Suquamish
    Search
  24. U. S. 191 (1978), the Court held that Indian tribes lack criminal jurisdiction over non-Indians.5 Montana v. United
    Search
  25. Ibid. 5 In Duro v. Reina
    Search
  26. not cover lands owned by, or held 6 Montana's statement of the governing law figured prominently in Brendale v. Confederated
    Search
  27. Tribes and Bands of Yakima Nation, 492 U. S. 408 (1989), and in South Dakota v. Bourland
    Search
  28. establishes tribal-court adjudicatory authority, even over the lawsuits involved in those cases. Accord, Brendale v. Confederated
    Search
  29. over the activities of non-Indians on reservation lands is an important part of tribal sovereignty. See Montana v. United
    Search
  30. Washington v. Confederated
    Search
  31. Fisher v. District
    Search
  32. U. S., at 565, with two prime exceptions, id., at 565-566. The case cited second is Washington v. Confederated
    Search
  33. U. S., at 153. The third case noted in conjunction with the Iowa Mutual statement is Fisher v. District
    Search
  34. and the United States point out that in Montana, as in later cases following Montana's instruction-Brendale v. Confederated
    Search
  35. Tribes and Bands of Yakima Nation, 492 U. S. 408 (1989), and South Dakota v. Bourland
    Search
  36. to detain and turn over to state officers nonmembers stopped on the highway for conduct violating state law. Cf. State v. Schmuck
    Search
  37. Williams v. Lee
    Search
  38. in neither case did the Court find a significant tribal interest at stake. See Montana Catholic Missions v. Missoula
    Search
  39. or federal courts will be the only forums competent to adjudicate those disputes. See National Farmers Union Ins. Coso v. Crow
    Search
  40. National Farmers Union Ins. Coso v. Crow
    Search
  41. and Iowa Mut. Ins. Co. v. LaPlante
    Search
  42. Montana v. United
    Search
  43. In Oliphant v. Suquamish
    Search
  44. and South Dakota v. Bourland
    Search
  45. Kurt v. BlueDog
    Search
  46. In Duro v. Reina
    Search
  47. Brendale v. Confederated
    Search
  48. Accord, Brendale v. Confederated
    Search
  49. See Montana v. United
    Search
  50. Cf. State v. Schmuck
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial