Quair

Quair v. Sisco

Good Law
359 F. Supp. 2d 948·2004 WL 3214396·2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27298
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 26, 2004CVF025891RECDLBCalifornia8,357 words

Opinion

Opinion

Coyle, J.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

On April 12, 2004, the court heard cross-motions for summary judgment in this consolidated case.

Upon due consideration of the record herein and the written and oral arguments of the parties, the court grants these motions in part and denies them in part as set forth herein.

Quair and Berna (hereinafter referred to as petitioners) respectively are proceeding in this court pursuant a First Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to Title I of the Indian Civil Rights Act (ICRA), 25 U.S.C. § 1301 et seq. Petitioners allege that they were members of the Santa Rosa Ranchería Tachi Indian Tribe (hereinafter Tribe) until they were illegally disenrolled and banished by respondents. Respondents Mike Sisco, Elmer Thomas, Kevin Thomas, Dena Begna, Elaine Jeff, Patricia Davis and Does 1-50, all named in their official capacities, are alleged to be enrolled members of the Tribe and are members of the General Council of the Tribe “or were individuals who were given official authority to bring criminal-type charges and cause the disenrollment and banishment of’ petitioners. Quair alleges in pertinent…

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.