United States of America, Nisqually Indian Tribe and Puyallup Indian Tribe, Intervenors-Appellants v. State of Washington, Department of Fisheries

Good Law
573 F.2d 1117·1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 11528
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 24, 197876-1112 and 76-1186California546 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kennedy, J.

The district court, in the issuance of orders to enforce its decree in United States v. Washington, 384 F.Supp. 312 (W.D.Wash. 1974), aff’d, 520 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 1086 , 96 S.Ct. 877 , 47 L.Ed.2d 97 (1976), ruled that the pink and chinook salmon fisheries lying wholly within reservations of the Puyallup and Nisqually tribes were subject to regulation by its decrees, and that the court had jurisdiction to order the tribes to curtail on-reservation fishing when necessary to effect court orders or to preserve the salmon runs. The Puyallup and Nisqually tribes appeal that order in No. 76-1112. The State of Washington has filed a cross appeal in No. 76-1186. For reasons stated below we have determined that both appeals should be dismissed.

The Indian tribes move to dismiss their own appeal in No. 76-1112, pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 42(b). The State of Washington opposes the voluntary dismissal requested by the tribes, arguing that the appeal concerns a question of law that is of substantial importance to the litigation and that is likely to recur. If it appeared that an appellant sought dismissal for the purpose of evading appellate…

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.