Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York

Second Circuit

Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York

178 F.3d 95, 1999 WL 308522

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedMay 17, 1999

DocketDocket Nos. 99-6003, 99-6005

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 178 F.3d 95 (Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Seneca Nation of Indians v. New York, 178 F.3d 95, 1999 WL 308522 (2d Cir. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

We affirm the orders of the district court denying the State of New York’s Eleventh Amendment defenses for substantially the reasons stated by Judge Curtin in the decision below. See Seneca Nation of Indians v. State of New York, 26 F.Supp.2d 555, 563-65 (W.D.N.Y.1998). In doing so, we note that the, State of New York retains its Eleventh Amendment immunity to the extent, that the Seneca Nation of Indians or the Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians raise claims or issues that are not identical to those made by the United States. See Arizona v. California, 460 U.S. 605, 614, 103 S.Ct. 1382, 75 L.Ed.2d 318 (1983) (holding that granting tribes leave to intervene in suit commenced by United States against states does not violate Eleventh Amendment because “[t]he Tribes do not seek to bring new claims or issues against the states”).

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

PER CURIAM:

We affirm the orders of the district court denying the State of New York’s Eleventh Amendment defenses for substantially the reasons stated by Judge Curtin in the decision below. See Seneca Nation of Indians v. State of New York, 26 F.Supp.2d 555, 563-65 (W.D.N.Y.1998). In doing so, we note that the, State of New York retains its Eleventh Amendment immunity to the extent, that the Seneca Nation of Indians or the Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians raise claims or issues that are not identical to those made by the United States. See Arizona v. California, 460 U.S. 605, 614, 103 S.Ct. 1382, 75 L.Ed.2d 318 (1983) (holding that granting tribes leave to intervene in suit commenced by United States against states does not violate Eleventh Amendment because “[t]he Tribes do not seek to bring new claims or issues against the states”).

Seneca Nation of Indians, United States of America, Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee v. State of New York George E. Pataki, as Governor Joseph Seymour, as Commissioner of the Office of General Services and Bernadette Castro, as Commissioner of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, Frederick W. Tapp, Jane E. Schuck, Kent Sandford, Richard J. McCutcheon Beverly A. McCutcheon Albert A. Hoffman, Lucy Hoffman, Myles Barraclough, Sandra Barraclough, Duane G. Glover, Paul H. Geer, Virginia M. Geer, Scott E. Fisher, Rosemary N. Fisher, William E. Campbell, David J. Gibson, Clarence J. Coffman, Jr., C. James Coffman, Sr., Jean Coffman, Eileen W. Garling, Robert F. Van Der Horst, Susan F. Van Der Horst, Joseph Chiapuso, Susan Chiapuso, Howard B. Whitney Estate, Deborah Baldwin, Robert L. Jones, Eugenia Jones, Stephen M. Kane, Clarence J. Coffman, Sr., Howard L. Luzier, Florence Luzier, Walter L. Whitney, Louise Hickey, Phillip Confer, Shirley Confer, David C. Williams, and Frances E. Williams, Seneca Nation of Indians, Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians, Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee, United States of America, on Its Own Behalf, and for the Benefit of the Seneca Nation of Indians and the Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians, Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee v. State of New York, Individually and as a Representative Class of Landowners Similarly Situated, the New York State Thruway Authority Erie County Moore Business Forms, Inc., Individually and as a Representative of a Class of Landowners Similarly Situated Inducom, Inc., Individually and as a Representative Class of Landowners Similarly Situated Rado-O-Mart, Inc., Individually and as a Representative Class of Landowners Similarly Situated Ilona H. Lang, Individually and as a Representative Class of Landowners Similarly Situated Robert W. Weaver, Individually and as a Representative Class of Landowners Similarly Situated Francis B. Pritchard, George E. Pataki, Bernadette Castro, Ronald W. Coan, John Cahill, Joseph Boardman, John R. Platt, Intervenors-Defendants

178 F.3d 95 (Second Circuit, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

178 F.3d 95, 1999 WL 308522, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/seneca-nation-of-indians-v-new-york-ca2-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack