Jicarilla Apache Tribe, Plaintiff-Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Supron Energy Corporation, Defendants-Appellees/cross-Appellants

Tenth Circuit

Jicarilla Apache Tribe, Plaintiff-Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Supron Energy Corporation, Defendants-Appellees/cross-Appellants

793 F.2d 1171, 88 Oil & Gas Rep. 531, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 26234

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

DecidedJune 18, 1986

Docket81-1680, 81-1860, 81-1871 to 81-1874 and 81-1939

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 793 F.2d 1171 (Jicarilla Apache Tribe, Plaintiff-Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Supron Energy Corporation, Defendants-Appellees/cross-Appellants) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Jicarilla Apache Tribe, Plaintiff-Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Supron Energy Corporation, Defendants-Appellees/cross-Appellants, 793 F.2d 1171, 88 Oil & Gas Rep. 531, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 26234 (10th Cir. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

The Government has moved the Court to modify its en banc opinion in this case, 782 F.2d 855, with respect to various conclusions regarding the Secretary’s fiduciary duty to the Tribe. Upon consideration, the motion to modify in the regard requested by the Government is denied. Judges Seth and Barrett would grant the Government’s motion.

On its own motion, the Court hereby supplements the en banc opinion. Citing Nevada v. United States, 463 U.S. 110, 114 n. 16, 103 S.Ct. 2906, 2921 n. 16, 77 L.Ed.2d 509 (1983), defendants have argued that the Government should pay the additional royalties owing as the result of this case because their nonpayment resulted from the Government’s breach of its fiduciary *1172 duty. We disagree. The allegation in Nevada was that the Government ineffectively represented the Tribe in a lawsuit, resulting in the Tribe being barred by res judicata from raising claims against third parties. The Court said in note 16 that the Tribe’s remedy was against the Government. While the Secretary failed in its duty to represent the Tribe’s interests in the present case, the relationship between the Tribe and defendant-lessees is contractual. The failure of the Secretary to require dual accounting resulted in the lessees paying an insufficient amount of royalties under the contract. That the Secretary breached its fiduciary duty to properly enforce the leases does not excuse the lessees from subsequently having to pay the amounts determined to be owed under the leases. Cf. Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Hick-el, 432 F.2d 587, 592 (10th Cir.1970). 1

The mandate in this case is stayed for 30 days to permit the timely filing of a petition for writ of certiorari. If a timely petition is filed, the stay shall remain in effect until the Supreme Court disposes of the petition.

1

. Judges Seth, McWilliams, and Barrett dissent from this conclusion.

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

The Government has moved the Court to modify its en banc opinion in this case, 782 F.2d 855, with respect to various conclusions regarding the Secretary’s fiduciary duty to the Tribe. Upon consideration, the motion to modify in the regard requested by the Government is denied. Judges Seth and Barrett would grant the Government’s motion.

On its own motion, the Court hereby supplements the en banc opinion. Citing Nevada v. United States, 463 U.S. 110, 114 n. 16, 103 S.Ct. 2906, 2921 n. 16, 77 L.Ed.2d 509 (1983), defendants have argued that the Government should pay the additional royalties owing as the result of this case because their nonpayment resulted from the Government’s breach of its fiduciary *1172 duty. We disagree. The allegation in Nevada was that the Government ineffectively represented the Tribe in a lawsuit, resulting in the Tribe being barred by res judicata from raising claims against third parties. The Court said in note 16 that the Tribe’s remedy was against the Government. While the Secretary failed in its duty to represent the Tribe’s interests in the present case, the relationship between the Tribe and defendant-lessees is contractual. The failure of the Secretary to require dual accounting resulted in the lessees paying an insufficient amount of royalties under the contract. That the Secretary breached its fiduciary duty to properly enforce the leases does not excuse the lessees from subsequently having to pay the amounts determined to be owed under the leases. Cf. Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Hick-el, 432 F.2d 587, 592 (10th Cir.1970). 1

The mandate in this case is stayed for 30 days to permit the timely filing of a petition for writ of certiorari. If a timely petition is filed, the stay shall remain in effect until the Supreme Court disposes of the petition.

1

. Judges Seth, McWilliams, and Barrett dissent from this conclusion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

793 F.2d 1171, 88 Oil & Gas Rep. 531, 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 26234, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jicarilla-apache-tribe-plaintiff-appellantcross-appellee-v-supron-energy-ca10-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack