Takeda Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Cherokee Nation

Cherokee Nation Supreme Court

Takeda Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Cherokee Nation

13 Am. Tribal Law 386

Cherokee Nation Supreme Court·Decided November 22, 2016·No. No. SC-16-02·Published

Opinion

OPINION

JAMES G. WILCOXEN, Justice.

THIS MATTER comes before the Court on appeal by Takeda Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al., (Takeda) the Defendant below, from an order of the District Court denying its motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The order was entered on January 21, 2016. Takeda contends that this appeal is necessary as a matter of judicial economy in order to avoid protracted litigation because the district court has no jurisdiction. Essentially, Takeda alleges that the Tribe has failed to either plead or prove facts establishing jurisdiction under the existing authority, including Montana v. U.S., 450 U.S. 544, 101 S.Ct. 1245, 67 L.Ed.2d 493 (1981).

This case must be remanded to the district court to further establish the record before this Court can hear this matter. Dearman v. Smithkline Beecham Corporation, SC-2010-02.

THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that this matter be remanded to the District Court for further proceedings consistent with the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Dollar General Corp., et al., v. [387] The Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, 579 U.S. -, 136 S.Ct. 2159, 195 L.Ed.2d 637 (2016); Dolgencorp., Inc., and Dollar General Corp., v. The Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, et al., 746 F.3d 167 (5th Cir.2014).

Concurring: TROY WAYNE POTEETE, Chief Justice, JOHN C. GARRETT, Justice, ANGELA JONES, Justice, LYNN BURRIS, Justice.

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

OPINION

JAMES G. WILCOXEN, Justice.

THIS MATTER comes before the Court on appeal by Takeda Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al., (Takeda) the Defendant below, from an order of the District Court denying its motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The order was entered on January 21, 2016. Takeda contends that this appeal is necessary as a matter of judicial economy in order to avoid protracted litigation because the district court has no jurisdiction. Essentially, Takeda alleges that the Tribe has failed to either plead or prove facts establishing jurisdiction under the existing authority, including Montana v. U.S., 450 U.S. 544, 101 S.Ct. 1245, 67 L.Ed.2d 493 (1981).

This case must be remanded to the district court to further establish the record before this Court can hear this matter. Dearman v. Smithkline Beecham Corporation, SC-2010-02.

THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that this matter be remanded to the District Court for further proceedings consistent with the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Dollar General Corp., et al., v. [387] The Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, 579 U.S. -, 136 S.Ct. 2159, 195 L.Ed.2d 637 (2016); Dolgencorp., Inc., and Dollar General Corp., v. The Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, et al., 746 F.3d 167 (5th Cir.2014).

Concurring: TROY WAYNE POTEETE, Chief Justice, JOHN C. GARRETT, Justice, ANGELA JONES, Justice, LYNN BURRIS, Justice.

Takeda Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Cherokee Nation, 13 Am. Tribal Law 386 (cherokee 2016).

Pincite

13 Am. Tribal Law 386 (Takeda Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Cherokee Nation) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related