Southern Puget Sound Intertribal Housing Authority v. Mckenney, (2008)

• Decision Date: 15 April 2008
• Docket Number: SHO-CIV-11/07-247
• Citation: Southern Puget Sound Intertribal Housing Authority v. Mckenney (Shoalwater Bay Tribal Ct. of App. 2008)
• Parties: SOUTHERN PUGET SOUND INTERTRIBAL HOUSING AUTHORITY, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, v. SAMANTHA MCKENNEY, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.
• Court: Shoalwater Bay Tribal Court of Appeals

SOUTHERN PUGET SOUND INTERTRIBAL HOUSING AUTHORITY, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, v. SAMANTHA MCKENNEY, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.

No. SHO-CIV-11/07-247

Shoalwater Bay Tribal Court of Appeals Shoalwater Bay Indian Reservation Tokeland, Washington

April 15, 2008

SYLLABUS BY THE COURT

SYLLABUS^*fn1

Trial court issued order evicting Defendant from tribal housing based on Defendant's failure to make payments.Court of Appeals holds that Defendant's notice of appeal fails to comply with statutory requirement that the notice identify an error that would affect the outcome of the case.Appeal dismissed.

OPINION

SUZANNE OJIBWAY TOWNSEND, CHIEF JUDGE.

This matter comes before the Shoalwater Bay Tribal Court of Appeals, Chief Judge Suzanne Ojibway Townsend presiding pursuant to the Notice of Appeal filed by Appellant on January 14, 2008.

The Shoalwater Bay Appellate Code requires an Appellant to claim in good faith that errors made by the Tribal Court"affected the outcome of the case."SBTC 19.03.010.The Appellate Code is clear that this requirement must be met for an appeal to be accepted for review.SBTC 19.05.010(c).See alsoSBTC 19.05.010(b)andSBTC 19.04.030(d)(The Court of Appeals shall accept the appeal only if the notice of appeal substantially complies with the requirement that the notice of appeal "list each error of law or procedure which the appellant claims was committed by the Shoalwater Bay Tribal Court and its effect on the outcome of the case.")(Emphasis added.)

The Complaint in this matter claims that Appellant breached her Rental Housing Lease Agreement by failing to make payments required under the Agreement and by failing to not use manufacture, sell or distribute any illegal controlled substance on the premises.Appellant's Notice of Appeal claims the Tribal Court erred by not providing her the time she requested to vacate the premises and by issuing its civil judgment even though Appellant had not been convicted of a crime involving controlled substances and the police were allegedly withholding evidence regarding the controlled substance charge.However, the Judgment and Order to Vacate entered by the Tribal Court on January 9, 2008 does not include any findings of fact or conclusions of law regarding possession or use of a controlled substance.On its face, the Judgment and Order to Vacate is based solely on Appellant's failure to make required payments.

Appellant's Notice of Appeal...