Hand v. Ho-Chunk Nation Office of Tribal Enrollment

10 Am. Tribal Law 1
CourtHo-Chunk Nation Trial Court
DecidedJune 29, 2011
DocketNo. CV 11-08
StatusPublished

This text of 10 Am. Tribal Law 1 (Hand v. Ho-Chunk Nation Office of Tribal Enrollment) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ho-Chunk Nation Trial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hand v. Ho-Chunk Nation Office of Tribal Enrollment, 10 Am. Tribal Law 1 (hochunkct 2011).

Opinion

[2]*2ORDER

(Petition Denied)

AMANDA L. ROCKMAN, Interim Chief Judge.

INTRODUCTION

This case concerns whether the petitioner can access monies from the Children’s Trust Fund (hereinafter CTF) to pay for costs associated with an automobile, by paying off the existing principal and interest on an existing car loan. The Court employs the standard enunciated in the Per Capita Distribution Ordinance (hereinafter Per Capita Ordinance), § 12.8c to assess the merit of the petitioner’s request. The analysis and holding of the Court follow below.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

The petitioner, Tasha Hand, initiated the current action by filing the January 31, 2011 Petition for Release of Per Capita Distribution (hereinafter Petition). Consequently, the Court issued a Summons accompanied by the above-mentioned Petition on the same date, and served the documents upon the respondent’s representative, Ho-Chunk Nation Department of Justice (hereinafter DOJ),1 by personal service as permitted by HCN R. Civ. P. 5(C)(1). The Summons informed the respondent of the right to file an Answer within twenty (20) days of the issuance of the Summons pursuant to HCN R. Civ. P. 5(A)(2). The respondent, by and through, DOJ Attorney Paul Rosheim, filed a timely February 10, 2011 Answer, requesting that the Court schedule the matter for a Fact-Finding Hearing. See Respondent’s Answer at 8.

In response, the Court mailed Notice(s) of Hearing to the identified parties on February 28, 2011, informing them of the date, time and location of the Fact-Finding Hearing. The Court convened the Hearing on March 22, 2011 at 1:30 p.m. CST. The following parties appeared at the Fact-Finding Hearing: Tasha Hand, petitioner, and DOJ Attorney Paul Rosh-eim, respondent’s counsel. On April 19, 2011, the petitioner submitted successive forms of documentation regarding income, monthly expenses, and vehicle pay off balance.

APPLICABLE LAW

PER CAPITA DISTRIBUTION ORDINANCE, 2 HCC § 12

Subsec. 8. Minors and Other Legal Incompetents.

a. The interests of minors and other legally incompetent Members, otherwise entitled to receive per capita payments, shall, in lieu of payments to such minor or incompetent Member, be disbursed to a Children’s Trust Fund which shall establish a formal irrevocable legal structure for such CTFs approved by the Legislature as soon after passage of this Ordinance as shall be practical, with any amounts currently held by the Nation for passage for the benefit of minor or legally incompetent Members, and all additions thereto pending approval and establishment of such formal irrevocable structure, to be held in an account for the benefit of each such Member-beneficiary under the supervision of the Trial Court of the Nation. Trust assets of such CTFs shall be invested in a reasonable and prudent manner, which [3]*3protects the principal and seeks a reasonable return.

b. Education Criterion.

(1) The trust assets of each such account maintained for a minor shall be disbursed to the Member-beneficiary thereof upon the earlier of (i) said Member-beneficiary meeting the dual criteria if [sic ] (a) reaching the age of eighteen (18) and (b) producing evidence of personal acquisition of a high school diploma to the Department of Enrollment (HSED, GED or any similar substitute shall not be acceptable), or (ii) the Member reaches the age of twenty-five (25); provided that this provision shall not operate to compel disbursement of funds to Members legally determined to be incompetent. In the event a Member, upon reaching the age of eighteen (18) does not produce proof of personal acquisition of a high school diploma, such Member’s per capita funds shall be retained in the CTF account and any and all per capita distributions payable to said Member after reaching age 18 will be added to such fund and not be paid to the Memberf,] and the CTF account and [sic ] shall be held on the same terms and conditions applied during the Member-beneficiary’s minority until the earliest to occur: (1) the Member produces the required diploma; (2) the Member reaches the age of twenty-five (25); or (3) the Member is deceased.

(2) Transition Rule. The following rule pertains to Tribal Members who reached age eighteen (18) on or before November 1, 2000 and have not received their CTF account due to failure to meet the graduation requirement shall [sic] receive the quarterly or other periodic per capita distributable to them with respect to all per capita payments made on or before November 1, 2001; after which periodic payments shall be added to their CTF account until they qualify for the distribution of the CTF by virtue of the provisions of paragraph 8b, above.

c. Funds in the CTF of a minor or legally incompetent Member may be available for the benefit of a beneficiary’s health, education, and welfare when the needs of such person are not being met from other Tribal funds or other state or federal public entitlement programs, and upon a finding of special need by the Ho-Chunk Nation Trial Court. In order to request such funds, the following provisions apply:

(1) A written request must be submitted to the Trial Court by the beneficiary’s parent or legal guardian detailing the purpose and needs for such funds.

(2) The parent or legal guardian shall maintain records and account to the Trial Court in sufficient detail to demonstrate that the funds disbursed were expended as required by this Ordinance and any other applicable federal law.

(3) Any other standards, procedures, and conditions that may be subsequently adopted by the Legislature consistent with any applicable federal law shall be met. HO-CHUNK NATION RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

Rule 5. Notice of Service of Process.

(A) Definitions.

(2) Summons—The official notice to the party informing him/her that he/she is identified as a party to an action or is being sued, that an Answer is due in twenty (20) calendar days (See HCN R. Civ. P. 6) and that a Default Judgment may be entered against them if they do not file an Answer in the prescribed time. It shall also include the name and location of the Court, the case number, and the names of the parties. The Summons shall be issued by the Clerk of Court and shall be served with a copy of the filed Complaint attached.

[4]*4(C) Methods of Service of Process.

(1) Personal Service. The required papers are delivered to the party in person by the bailiff, or when authorized by the Court, a law enforcement officer from any jurisdiction, or any other person not a party to the action who is eighteen (18) years of age or older and of suitable discretion.

(8) After the first successful service of process, the Court and the parties will then perform all written communications through regular mail at that address. Therefore, each party to an action has an affirmative duty to notify the Court, and all other parties, of a change in address within ten (10) calendar days of such change.

Rule 23. Naming Parties.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

§ 2710
25 U.S.C. § 2710

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
10 Am. Tribal Law 1, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hand-v-ho-chunk-nation-office-of-tribal-enrollment-hochunkct-2011.