Citizens Potawatomi Nation v. Freeman

• Decision Date: 29 November 1993
• Citation: 113 F.3d 1245
• Parties: 97 CJ C.A.R. 698 NOTICE: Although citation of unpublished opinions remains unfavored, unpublished opinions may now be cited if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue, and a copy is attached to the citing document or, if cited in oral argument, copies are furnished to the Court and all parties. See General Order of
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit

Page 1245

113 F.3d 1245

97 CJ C.A.R. 698

NOTICE: Although citation of unpublished opinions remains unfavored, unpublished opinions may now be cited if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue, and a copy is attached to the citing document or, if cited in oral argument, copies are furnished to the Court and all parties. See General Order of November 29, 1993, suspending 10th Cir. Rule 36.3 until December 31, 1995, or further order.

CITIZENS POTAWATOMI NATION, a/k/a Citizen Band Potawatomi Indian Tribe of Oklahoma, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Leamon FREEMAN, The Honorable Leamon Freeman District Judge for the Seventh Judicial District; C & L Enterprises, Inc., an Oklahoma corporation, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 96-6279.

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

May 8, 1997.

ORDER AND JUDGMENT ^*

Before PORFILIO and LOGAN, Circuit Judges, and BURRAGE, District Judge. ^**

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously to grant the parties' request for a decision on the briefs without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(f) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

Plaintiff Citizens Potawatomi Nation appeals from the dismissal of this action on abstention grounds. The complaint sought to enjoin/invalidate a state arbitration-enforcement proceeding brought by defendant C & L Enterprises, Inc., on the basis that it violated the Nation's sovereign immunity and, hence, exceeded state jurisdiction. C & L moved for dismissal, contending the district court should, rather, facilitate the state's pending resolution of the matter by abstaining under Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971). Opposing C & L's motion, the Nation argued that because Oklahoma rejects tribal sovereign immunity for off-reservation commercial activities like those involved here--in direct conflict with the case law of this circuit ¹--it would be improper to defer determination of this federal guarantee to the state courts. The district court held the state action provided an adequate opportunity to raise federal issues, and dismissed under Younger.

At the present time, the state trial court has entered judgment for C & L over the Nation's sovereign immunity objection; the Oklahoma Court of Appeals has affirmed that judgment on the basis of the state authority cited supra note 1; and the Oklahoma Supreme Court has denied certiorari, ordered the entry of judgment on the Nation's supersedeas bond, and remanded for an award of appellate fees. In short, although the ancillary fee proceedings and post-judgment collection efforts may not be concluded, the substance of the case, in particular the Nation's entitlement to tribal sovereign immunity, has been finally and unequivocally resolved. Thus, the Nation's attempt to forestall an allegedly unauthorized exercise of state court jurisdiction has been effectively rendered a collateral attack on the state courts' resultant disposition.

Given this posture of the case, the appropriate focus is no longer on the district court's abstention order. Whatever the merits of that ruling, the current availability of any federal relief for the Nation turns on the preclusive effect accorded the state courts' determination of its sovereign immunity claim--an issue the parties have not briefed and the district court has not considered. See generally Durfee v. Duke, 375 U.S. 106, 114 & n. 12 (1963) (noting "sovereign immunity may in some contexts be controlling" over rule respecting finality of jurisdictional determinations, citing United States v. United States Fidelity & Guar. Co., 309 U.S. 506 (1940)); Kiowa Tribe v. Lewis, 777 F.2d 587,...