United Indian Health etc. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. CA1/5

BACKGROUND

A.

Because Indian tribes are separate sovereigns, they are immune from suit in state and federal courts absent waiver or congressional abrogation. (See People v. Miami Nation Enterprises (2016) 2 Cal.5th 222, 234 (Miami Nation); Self v. Cher-Ae Heights Indian Community of Trinidad Rancheria (2021) 60 Cal.App.5th 209, 213 (Cher-Ae Heights).) In addition to protecting tribes from the burdens of litigation, immunity serves the interests of tribal self-sufficiency, self-governance, and economic development. (Miami Nation, at p. 235; Cher-Ae Heights, at p. 213.)

Tribal immunity may also extend to an entity that is affiliated with an Indian tribe but is not itself a tribe. (Miami Nation, supra, 2 Cal.5th at pp. 237, 239, 244-248.) To determine whether a tribal affiliate should be considered an “arm of the tribe” and therefore entitled to the tribe’s immunity, courts consider five factors that assess the relationship and organizational proximity between the tribe and the entity. (Id. at pp. 244-248.) The arm-of-the-tribe inquiry examines (1) the affiliate’s method of creation; (2) whether the tribe intended to share its immunity; (3) the affiliate’s purpose; (4) the level…