Mike v. Mike

7 Am. Tribal Law 186
CourtHo-Chunk Nation Trial Court
DecidedJune 14, 2007
DocketNo. CV 99-42
StatusPublished

This text of 7 Am. Tribal Law 186 (Mike v. Mike) 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
Mike v. Mike, 7 Am. Tribal Law 186 (hochunkct 2007).

Opinion

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

MARK BUTTERFIELD, Chief Judge.

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff brought this case on June 30, 1999 alleging elder abuse by her grandson, J.T.M. and requesting a Temporary Restraining Order [TRO] keeping him at a safe distance from her and requesting that he be removed from her home. The Court granted a TRO on June 30, 1999 after an ex parte hearing in which Ms. Mike’s attorney called a TAU worker to substantiate the reasons for a TRO. The Court called an elder, Dennis Funmaker to establish that it had subject matter jurisdiction under the customs and traditions of the Ho-Chunk Nation. All parties to this case are members of the Ho-Chunk Nation.

Notice was then given to the defendants of the TRO and the time set for a hearing in this matter. The hearing was held on July 9, 1999. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Court granted the Preliminary Injunction and stated that it would be reduced to writing.

Due to a death in the family of the presiding judge the written order was delayed. The Court now memorializes its decision of July 9, 1999.

APPLICABLE LAW

The Ho-Chunk Nation lacks an elder abuse statute. Therefore, the Court took testimony from elder Dennis Funmaker of the Bear Clan on the custom of “respect for elders.” According to Mr. Funmaker, respect for elders is considered a type of law. It is one of the more important customs of the Tribe. This is due to several factors. The elders have fostered us, our knowledge of customs come from their knowledge of the past and what has been passed down. The elders have taken care of us from before. They are to be respected for this and held in a place of honor. It is the duty of the younger generation to take care of the elders. Elders are always served first at tribal events and are served by their younger relatives. They are given special care in seating and their disabilities are accommodated whenever possible.

The punishment for mistreatment of an elder under custom varied from banish[188]*188ment from the village to having the Bear Clan, the “warukos” of the village, take away or destroy the property of the person who abused the elder.

HCN CONSTITITION

PREAMBLE

We the People, pursuant to our inherent sovereignty, in order to form a more perfect government, secure our 'rights, ad-ranee the general welfare, safeguard our interests, sustain our culture, 'promote our traditions and perpetuate our existence, and secure the natural and self-evident right to govern ourselves, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the Ho-Chunk Nation.

HCN Const. Art. I,

Section 1. Territory. The territory of the Ho-Chunk Nation shall include all lands held by the Nation or the People, or by the United States for the benefit of the Nation or the People, and any additional lands acquired by the Nation or by the United States for the benefit of the Nation or the people, including but not limited to air, water, surface, subsurface, natural resources and any interest therein, notwithstanding the issuance of any patent or right-of-way in fee or otherwise, by the governments of the United States or the Ho-Chunk Nation, existing or in the future.

SErrioN 2. Jurisdiction, The jurisdiction of the Ho-Chunk Nation shall extend to all territory set forth in Section 1 of this Article and to any and all persons or activities therein, based upon the inherent sovereign authority of the Nation and the People or upon Federal law.

HCN Const. Art. VII,

Section 5. Jurisdiction of the Judiciary.

(a) The Trial Court shall have original jurisdiction over all cases and controversies, both criminal and civil, in law or in equity, arising under the Constitution, laws, customs and traditions of the Ho-Chunk Nation, including cases in which the Ho-Chunk Nation, or its officials and employees, shall be a party. Any such case or controversy arising within the jurisdiction of the Ho-Chunk Nation shall be filed in Trial Court before it is filed in any other court. This grant of jurisdiction by the General Council shall not be construed to be a waiver of the Nation’s sovereign immunity.

Section 6. Po wers of the Trial Cou rt.

(a) The Trial Court shall have the power to make findings of fact and conclusions of law. The Trial Court shall have the power to issue all remedies in law and in equity including injunctive and declaratory relief and all writs including attachment and mandamus.

FACTS

1. Pauline B. (Winneshiek) Mike is an elder member of the Ho-Chunk Nation. She is in her early eighties and is frail. She is a member of one of the upper or sky clans.

2. Loylee B. Mike is Pauline’s daughter. She is employed at Rainbow Casino in the maintenance department and works during the day shift.

3. J.T.M. is Loylee’s 12 year old son who resides with her in Pauline Mike’s home near Nekoosa, WI.

4. All three Mike’s lived together prior to June 30, 1999 in a house built by Ho-Chunk Housing for Pauline B. Mike.

5. Pauline B. Mike was diagnosed with cancer three years ago which is presently in remission and is unable to take care of herself. Two years ago, she had Loylee and her grandson J.T.M. moved in to look after her and take care of things she could not do for herself.

[189]*1896. Pauline B Mike testified that J.T.M. caused a great deal of damage to her newly constructed two year old home. She identified 15 pictures that were taken from her home showing stains on the carpet and damage to the walls and fixtures inflicted by J.T.M. Two rottweilers were kept by J.T.M. at the home and allowed full access to ran loose in the house.1 Ms. Mike testified that many of the carpet stains were due to dog feces and urination from the two rottweilers that was neither controlled by her daughter Loylee and/or her grandson J.T.M., nor cleaned up.

7. The home w7as a two year old structure built for Ms. Mike by the Tribe. The testimony and pictures showed a house that was filthy, unkempt and unsanitary. There were holes punched in the sheet rock, fixtures damaged, doorknobs and hardware missing and damaged. This was in contrast to Pauline Mike’s previous habits of tidiness and cleanliness testified to by her other daughter Ernestine Mike Helgeson.

8. J.T.M. put Pauline in fear by acts of violence. He broke her son’s truck windshield, and made holes in the wall with a large knife that was put into evidence. Pauline also testified that J.T.M. damaged a porch, broke windows in it and that it is unusable as a storage site.

9. J.T.M. got into fights with a sister who occasionally visited and “hollered” at her in Pauline’s house. The displays of temper and violence during the fights intimidated and threatened Pauline B. Mike.

10. J.T.M. refused to respond to any requests made of him by Pauline and generally acted deaf around her. This is contrary to custom in which older children and teenagers are expected to listen and obey the reasonable requests of their elders. Though Pauline spoke to him with kindness J.T.M. either ignored her or refused to obey.

11. Pauline testified credibly that she was afraid of her grandson. Her daughter Loylee wouldn’t listen to her and J.T.M. bossed her daughter Loylee around. J.T.M. took tools from Pauline’s bedroom where he was prohibited to go.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
7 Am. Tribal Law 186, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mike-v-mike-hochunkct-2007.