Enterprise Electric Co. v. Blackfeet Tribe of Indians, Civ. No. 3066.
Decision Date | 06 February 1973 |
Docket Number | Civ. No. 3066. |
Citation | 353 F. Supp. 991 |
Parties | ENTERPRISE ELECTRIC CO., a corporation, Plaintiff, v. The BLACKFEET TRIBE OF INDIANS and Sletten Construction Company, a Montana corporation, Defendants. |
Court | U.S. District Court — District of Montana |
Norman L. Newhall, III, Scott, Linnell & Neill, Great Falls, Mont., for plaintiff.
Philip E. Roy, Browning, Mont., for the Blackfeet Tribe of Indians.
This action is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
The defendant, whose proper name is "The Blackfeet Tribe of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation," is a federal corporation chartered on July 18, 1936, by the Secretary of the Interior (charter ratified August 15, 1936) under the provisions of the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934, 48 Stat. 984, 25 U.S.C. § 461 et seq. According to the complaint the defendant employed plaintiff by written contract to perform electrical work on a tribal center complex. Defendant performed the work and has not been paid. This action is brought to recover the money due.
The charter contains a waiver of the tribe's sovereign immunity. The waiver is limited1 and provides that the federal corporation may be sued in a court of competent jurisdiction.
The federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, and a United States district court has only that jurisdiction entrusted to it by an act of Congress.2 Whatever might be the effect of the words "be sued in courts of competent jurisdiction"3 appearing in an act of Congress, those words appearing in a charter issued by the Secretary of Interior could not vest in the United States district court a jurisdiction it did not otherwise possess.
The fact that the defendant is a federal corporation does not give the court jurisdiction.4
There is no diversity jurisdiction. The complaint alleges that plaintiff is a Montana corporation and the court takes judicial notice of the fact that the principal and only place of business of the defendant is in the State of Montana.5
28 U.S.C. § 1362 provides a limited jurisdiction in actions brought by an Indian tribe and is not applicable here.
No action of Congress has been cited and none can be found granting jurisdiction of this dispute to this court.
1
* * * * *
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians v. State of Okl. ex rel. Moss
...district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over this cause under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1362, citing Enterprise Electric Co. v. Blackfeet Tribe of Indians, 353 F.Supp. 991 (D.Mont.1973). 8 There a Montana corporation sued the tribe for money due under a contract for electrical work on a trib......
-
Veeder v. Omaha Tribe of Nebraska
...its principal place of business for diversity jurisdictional purposes." Gaines, 8 F.3d at 729 (citing Enterprise Elec. Co. v. Blackfeet Tribe of Indians, 353 F.Supp. 991, 992 (D.Mont.1973)).13 The Tribe makes what is plainly a facial challenge to diversity jurisdiction when it argues that "......
-
World Fuel Services v. Nambe Pueblo Development
...for diversity jurisdiction purposes." Gaines v. Ski Apache, 8 F.3d at 729 (citing Enterprise Elec. Co. v. Blackfeet Tribe of Indians, 353 F.Supp. 991, 992 (D. Mont. 1973) (Smith, C.J.) ). Nambe Corp. is a federally chartered corporation chartered under the IRA. See Federal Charter at 3. Nam......
-
Kenai Oil and Gas, Inc. v. Dept. of Interior
...1382, 1385 (D.Idaho 1976); Pambrun v. Blackfeet Tribe, 400 F.Supp. 1394, 1395 (D.Mont. 1975); Enterprise Electric Co. v. Blackfeet Tribe of Indians, 353 F.Supp. 991, 992 (D.Mont.1973); Atkinson v. Haldane, 569 P.2d at 174; Martinez v. Southern Ute Tribe, 150 Colo. 504, 374 P.2d 691, 694 (19......