 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1
.
NNOT REASONABLY BE INFERRED FROM CONDUCT THAT IS AS CONSISTENT WITH COMPETITION AS WITH A PLAINTIFFS CONSPIRACY THEORY
|
EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
TRIBES ALASKA JURISDICTION DOT LAKE TRIBAL COURT NATIVE VILLAGES LAW MATTER SOVEREIGN CHILD INHERENT TETLIN TRIBAL COURT PETITIONERS POWERS RECOGNITION SUPREME COURT AUTHORITY BIA REASONING SUPERIOR COURT REQUEST REFERRING INDIAN TRIBES PUBLIC LAW VENETIE ENDNOTE DIVEST NENANA UNITED STATES |
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT AT PALMER In the Matter of the Adoption of: ARB DOB: CASE NO. 3PA-98-90 CIV ORDER Petitioners have requested this court to find that the Dot Lake Village Council does not have r, in the alternative, that the tribe waived any jurisdiction it may have had when it referred the that the recognition of the sovereign status of Dot Lake by the BIA means that Dot Lake has y over the child. The court further finds that Dot Lake did not waive its jurisdiction when it here is nothing in state or federal law that precludes a tribal court from authorizing an f cannot hear the case due to a conflict of interest. The basic facts in this case are not in dispute. Petitioners are the Native uncle and d's mother, S.L., agreed to give the child to petitioners, an agreement that was formalized by the rest in regaining the child, the tribal court held a hearing on December 28, 1998. Mr. B and his at it preferred that Ms. L and Mr. B settle the matter, but it also stated that due to the close e court, the Dot Lake court could not hear the case. The court therefore stated that it would refer cation were required. Neither Mr. B nor his attorney objected at that time to the notion of a nacross rather than Tetlin hear the case. Petitioners argue that pursuant to In Re F.P., 843 P.2d 1214 (Alaska 1992), Dot Lake never had at by referring the case to Tetlin, Dot Lake actually attempted to give Tetlin jurisdiction overSNIPPETS: |
|
|
| | | |
|
|
