Makah Indian Tribe v. C. William Verity

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that tribes who shared treaty fishing rights to salmon had an interest in the Makah Tribe’s claim seeking reallocation of the treaty salmon harvest
• concluding, in the Rule 19 context, that “[t]he moving party has the burden of persuasion in arguing for dismissal” (citation omitted)
• finding that Rule 19 is “a practical [rule] and fact specific, and is designed to avoid the harsh results of rigid application”
• describing district court’s ruling that absent tribes may have interest in suit where increased shares of common tribal fund were at stake
• finding no abuse of discretion in the district court’s Rule 19 dismissal because the involved tribes enjoyed sovereign immunity
• \[A]ll of the tribes have an equal interest in an administrative process that is lawful.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).