Lamere

Lamere v. the Superior Court

Good Law
131 Cal. App. 4th 1059·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 1230·2005 Daily Journal DAR 9541·31 Cal. Rptr. 3d 880·2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6981
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 8, 2005E036474California3,433 words

Opinion

Opinion

Richli, J.

Petitioners, defendants in the trial court, are members of the Enrollment Committee of the Temecula Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pechanga Indian Reservation, commonly known as the Pechanga Band (Band). Real parties in interest (real parties), plaintiffs below, were enrolled members of the Band at the time of the commencement of this action.

According to the complaint, defendants have initiated “disenrollment procedures” against plaintiffs on the general ground that the ancestor from whom plaintiffs claimed descent was not one of the “original Pechanga people” and her descendants therefore did not qualify as Band members. Plaintiffs’ objections to the procedures are generally as follows: 1) the disenrollment proceedings had been improperly instituted by fewer than 51 percent of the committee members; 2) the tribal chairman had removed several members, leaving an insufficient number to take valid action; 3) members of the committee were improperly reinstated to create a false quorum; 4) the committee is imposing proof requirements on plaintiffs that are more strict than set out in Pechanga law; and 5) the committee acts inconsistently and arbitrarily in deciding…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.