Nichols v. Rysavy, 593
| Citation | 809 F.2d 1317 |
| Decision Date | 25 February 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. 3196,Nos. 85-5234,No. 593,85-5432,85-5445,No. 1163,No. 142,D,86-5034,593,3196,1163,142,s. 85-5234 |
| Parties | Katherine B. NICHOLS, Individually and as Special Administratrix of the Estate of Amelia Huston Nicholseceased, Appellant, v. Don RYSAVY, Margaret Rysavy, Raymond DeMers, Leo Novotny, Raymont DeMers, Geraldine DeMers, Doris Rysavy, Estates of W. & A. Rysavy, J. Rysavy, James Rysavy, William Rysavy, Amelia Rysavy, the United States of America, Hon. Donald P. Hodel as United States Secretary of the Interior, Ken Smith as Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs, Appellees. Clover POTTER, Individually and as the Special Administratrix of the Estate of James Wilde, Appellant, v. STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA, United States of America, Donald P. Hodel as U.S. Secretary of the Interior, Ken Smith as Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs, Appellees. Gladys ECOFFEY, Individually and as Special Administratrix of the Estate of John Yellow Bird, Appellant, v. WASHABAUGH COUNTY, United States of America, Donald P. Hodel as U.S. Secretary of the Interior, Ken Smith as Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs, Appellees. Chicago Title Insurance Company, First American Title Insurance Company, Lawyers Title Insurance Corporation, Safeco Title Insurance Company of Idaho, Stewart Title Guaranty Company, Ticor Title Insurance Company, Title Insurance Company of Minnesota, Transamerica Title Insurance Company, USLIFE Title Insurance Company of America, Amici Curiae For Appellees. Rosemond GOINS, Individually and as Special Administratrix of the Estate of Ida Huston Roubideaux, Appellants, v. Nick ASSMAN, Edwin Assman, W.O. Assman, William Assman, Isabelle Assman, Dorothy Assman, Donald Assman, Clarence Assman, Sadie Assman, Joe Assman, Esther Assman, Assman Realty, the United States of America, Honorable James Watt, as United States Secretary of the Interior; Ken Smith, as Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs, Appellees. Lois Emery FALLIS, Individually and on behalf of the Heirs, Devisees, Benefactors and Assigns of Robert Emery, |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit) |
Page 1317
Administratrix of the Estate of Amelia Huston
Nichols No. 593, Deceased, Appellant,
v.
Don RYSAVY, Margaret Rysavy, Raymond DeMers, Leo Novotny,
Raymont DeMers, Geraldine DeMers, Doris Rysavy, Estates of
W. & A. Rysavy, J. Rysavy, James Rysavy, William Rysavy,
Amelia Rysavy, the United States of America, Hon. Donald P.
Hodel as United States Secretary of the Interior, Ken Smith
as Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs,
Appellees.
Clover POTTER, Individually and as the Special
Administratrix of the Estate of James Wilde, Appellant,
v.
STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA, United States of America, Donald P.
Hodel as U.S. Secretary of the Interior, Ken Smith
as Assistant Secretary of the Interior
for Indian Affairs, Appellees.
Gladys ECOFFEY, Individually and as Special Administratrix
of the Estate of John Yellow Bird, Appellant,
v.
WASHABAUGH COUNTY, United States of America, Donald P. Hodel
as U.S. Secretary of the Interior, Ken Smith as
Assistant Secretary of the Interior for
Indian Affairs, Appellees.
Chicago Title Insurance Company, First American Title
Insurance Company, Lawyers Title Insurance Corporation,
Safeco Title Insurance Company of Idaho, Stewart Title
Guaranty Company, Ticor Title Insurance Company, Title
Insurance Company of Minnesota, Transamerica Title Insurance
Company, USLIFE Title Insurance Company of America, Amici
Curiae For Appellees.
Rosemond GOINS, Individually and as Special Administratrix
of the Estate of Ida Huston Roubideaux, Appellants,
v.
Nick ASSMAN, Edwin Assman, W.O. Assman, William Assman,
Isabelle Assman, Dorothy Assman, Donald Assman, Clarence
Assman, Sadie Assman, Joe Assman, Esther Assman, Assman
Realty, the United States of America, Honorable James Watt,
as United States Secretary of the Interior; Ken Smith, as
Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs, Appellees.
Lois Emery FALLIS, Individually and on behalf of the Heirs,
Devisees, Benefactors and Assigns of Robert Emery,
deceased, Appellant,
v.
G.W. HOLMES and Delores Holmes, United States of America,
Honorable William Horn, United States Secretary of the
Interior and Ross Swimmer, as Assistant Secretary of the
Interior for Indian Affairs, Appellees.
Shirley Lee BORDEAUX, Individually and as Special
Administratrix of the Estate of Clara Hudson, No.
3196, deceased, Appellant,
v.
Mary Ann HUNT, Estate of Lyle T. Hunt; Alvina Woockmann,
The United States of America: Honorable Donald Hodel, as
United States Secretary of the Interior; Ken Smith, as
Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs, Appellees.
Mary PRITZKAU, Individually and as Special Administratrix of
the Estate of Narcisse Rich, Allotment No. 1163,
Deceased, Appellant,
v.
COTTONWOOD RANCH & LIVESTOCK CO., Charles Steen, Vera Steen,
Louis Buduhl, Chester Buduhl, the United States of America,
Honorable Donald Hodel, as Secretary of the Interior; Ken
Smith, Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs,
Tri-County Water Association, Appellees.
Mary H. PRITZKAU, Individually and as Special Administratrix
of the Estate of Julia Narcelle, Appellant,
v.
Helen LARSON, Estate of Clifford Larson; Ziebach County,
The United States of America, Honorable Donald Hodel, as
United States Secretary of the Interior; and Ken Smith,
Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs, Appellees.
Elsie BONSER, Individually and as Estate Administratrix of
the Estate of Mattie J. Bonser, No. 142 1/2,
Deceased, Appellant,
v.
Ruth SHELBOURN; Julius Wahl; Dorothy Wahl; Todd County
Independent School District; Joseph Shelbourn; Floyd
Reagle; Ethelena Reagle; The United States of America;
Honorable Donald Hodel, as United States Secretary of the
Interior and Ken Smith, as Assistant Secretary of the
Interior for Indian Affairs, Appellees.
Anna Rose LAPOINTE, individually, and as Special
Administratrix of the Estate of Lena Lima
Bourdeaux, Appellant,
v.
C. & M. McCORMICK; Mary Abdellah; Charles McCormick; Will
Maggrett; United States of America; Honorable Donald
Hodel, as United States Secretary of the Interior and Ken
Smith, as Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Indian
Affairs, Appellees.
Duane R. SANOVIA, Individually and as Special Administrator
of the Estate of James Sanovia, Deceased, Appellant,
v.
Leslie HANDCOCK, Thelma Handcock, Mae Handcock, Estate of
M.D. Handcock, United States of America; Donald Hodel,
Secretary of the Interior; Ken Smith, Assistant Secretary
of the Interior for Indian Affairs, Appellees.
Mary Louise BORDEAUX, Individually and as Special
Administratrix of the Estate of Clementine Hudson, Appellant,
v.
Henry HORN, Marion Horn, Elmer Horn, Estate of A. Horn, Anna
Horn, United States of America; Honorable Donald Hodel, as
Secretary of the Interior; Ken Smith, Assistant Secretary
of the Interior for Indian Affairs, Appellees.
Marceline HASTINGS, Individually, and as Special
Administratrix of the Estate of Frank McCloskey,
Deceased, Appellant,
v.
PLATTE VALLEY AND INVESTMENT CO.; Earl Hollenbeck; Vincent
Hollenbeck; V. Hollenbeck; The United States of America;
Honorable Donald Hodel, as United States Secretary of the
Interior and Ken Smith, as Assistant Secretary of the
Interior for Indian Affairs, Appellees.
Marceline HASTINGS, Individually and as Special
Administrator of the Estate of Mary Pure
Blacksmith, Deceased, Appellants,
v.
Frank MASSA, Esther Massa, Guisto Massa, Maria Massa,
Charlotte Abrams, a/k/a C. Cherniak; The United States of
America; Honorable Donald Hodel, as Secretary of the
Interior; Ken Smith, as Assistant Secretary of the Interior
for Indian Affairs, Appellees.
Eighth Circuit.
Decided Jan. 15, 1987.
Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied Feb. 25, 1987.
Page 1320
Kim Gottschalk, Boulder, Colo., for appellant.
Maria Iizuka, Washington, D.C., for Government.
John Guhin, Pierre, S.D., for State.
Tom Tobin, Winner, S.D., for private parties.
Before LAY, Chief Judge, HENLEY, Senior Circuit Judge, and MAGILL, Circuit Judge.
MAGILL, Circuit Judge.
From 1916 to 1921, appellants' ancestors received fee simple patents, granting them full title to land allotments originally held for them in trust by the United States. These fourteen cases, consolidated on appeal, stem from the government's issuance of those fee patents. Appellants claim that the fee patents were illegally issued to their forebears, thus voiding all later transfers of the property. Appellants seek recognition that the land is still held in trust, return of possession, damages for wrongful possession, and attorneys' fees. Appellees are the United States, the State of South Dakota, Washabaugh County, South Dakota (now Jackson County), and various private landowners who obtained the land in good faith through chain of title. Several title insurance companies filed amicus curiae briefs for appellees. The district courts 1 entered summary judgment for appellees. We affirm, based on the following: (1) We do not reach the legality of the forced fee patents, as our disposition rests on purely procedural grounds. (2) The statute of limitations in 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2401(a) bars this action as against the United States. (3) The United States is an indispensable party, requiring dismissal of the action as to all appellants with prejudice. (4) Another potential source of limitation on appellants' claims is 25 U.S.C. Sec. 347.
I. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND.
These cases arise from the General Allotment Act (Dawes Act) of February 8, 1887, Ch. 119, 24 Stat. 388 (codified as amended at 25 U.S.C. Sec. 331 et seq.). The Dawes Act reflected a:
policy of encouraging the assimilation of Indians into the white man's culture. * * * This policy was carried out by "alloting" to individual Indians sufficient resources
Page 1321
to enable them to become independent farmers and ranchers. * * * As stated in [a] Senate Report [in 1907]:The policy of alloting Indian lands in severality, so as to break up the old tribal relations, has been going on for years. Ultimately the Indian must become a citizen and work upon the new lines necessarily created by his present environments. He must learn to farm, to raise live stock, and to abandon the aboriginal methods of life. Large areas of Indian lands have already been thus alloted, and many of the tribes have become farmers and stock raisers.
United States v. Overlie, 730 F.2d 1159, 1162 (8th Cir.1984).
The Dawes Act divided up Indian reservations when they could "be advantageously utilized for agricultural or grazing purposes" by the Indians. Indians then received individual land allotments, with the United States holding title in trust for the allottees for twenty-five years, during which time an allotment could not be sold, mortgaged, or taxed. After twenty-five years, the allottee or his heirs received the land in fee simple.
The main purpose of the twenty-five-year trust period was "for the new citizen to become accustomed to his new life, to learn his rights as a citizen, and prepare himself to cope on an equal footing with any white man who might attempt to cheat him out of his newly acquired property * * *." Statement of Rep. Skinner, 18 Cong.Rec. 190 (1886), quoted in United States v. Mitchell, 445 U.S. 535, 544 n. 5, 100 S.Ct. 1349, 1354-55 n. 5, 63 L.Ed.2d 607 (1980).
In South Dakota, individual Indian allotments were created by the Act of March 2, 1889, Ch. 405, 25 Stat. 888, which divided the Great Sioux Reservation into seven smaller reservations. See United States v. Erickson, 478 F.2d 684, 686 (8th Cir.1973). Sections 8 through 11 of the 1889 Act authorized individual allotments, similar to those created under the Dawes Act, and section 11 provided that "each and every allottee under this act shall be entitled to all the rights and privileges and be subject to all the provisions of section six of" the Dawes Act. Section 6 of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pettiford v. City of Greensboro
... ... The City relies principally on one case, Nichols v. Rysavy, 809 F.2d 1317 (8th Cir.1987), to argue that the Federal Parties' sovereign immunity ... ...
-
Lord v. Babbitt, F94-0011 CV (JKS).
... ... v. United States, 165 U.S. 379, 383, 17 S.Ct. 337, 339, 41 L.Ed. 754 (1897); see also Nichols v. Rysavy, 610 F.Supp. 1245, 1252 (D.S.D.1985), aff'd on other grounds, 809 F.2d 1317 (8th ... ...
-
Yankton Sioux Tribe v. Podhradsky
... ... Its provisions are meant "to stabilize the tribal land base," Nichols v. Rysavy, 809 F.2d 1317, 1323 (8th Cir.1987), and to that end the legislation was "designed to ... ...
-
Tribe v. Podhradsky
... ... Its provisions are meant “to stabilize the tribal land base,” ... Nichols v. Rysavy, 809 F.2d 1317, 1323 (8th Cir.1987), and to that end the legislation was “designed to ... ...
-
CHAPTER 12 NATIVE AMERICAN JURISDICTION AND PERMITTING
...354 and 381. [20] Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians v. United States, 861 F.Supp. 841, 844 (D.Minn. 1994). [21] See, Nichols v. Rysavy, 809 F.2d 1317, 1321 (8th Cir. 1987), cert, denied 484 U.S. 848 (1987). [22] The quantity of lands allotted often varied depending on the status of the part......
-
CHAPTER 5 EXAMINATION OF TITLE TO INDIAN LANDS
..., 339, 341, 342, 348, 349, 354 and 381. [70] F. Cohen, Handbook of Federal Indian Law 129 (1982 ed.). [71] See, Nichols v. Rysavy, 809 F.2d 1317, 1321 (8th Cir. 1987), cert. denied 484 U.S. 848 (1987). [72] The quantity of lands allotted often varied depending on the status of the party rec......
-
CHAPTER 8 EXAMINATION OF TITLE TO INDIAN LANDS
...of Indian Affairs, 767 F.2d 614 (9th Cir. 1985). [59] F. Cohen, Handbook of Federal Indian Law 129 (1982 ed.) [60] Nichols v. Rysavy, 809 F.2d 1317, 1321 (8th Cir. 1987). [61] The quantity of lands allotted often varied depending on the status of the party receiving the allotment (e.g., hea......