Supreme Court of Minnesota· 12/11/1997

State v. Stone

Citations

572 N.W.2d 725
1997 WL 761278

How courts have described this case

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

holding that absent express grant of jurisdiction, state law may be applied to Indians in Indian country if “exceptional circumstances” exist
holding that the laws involved in the case were civil/regulatory and therefore “the state lacks jurisdiction under Public Law 280 to enforce them against members of the White Earth Band of Chippewa for conduct occurring within the boundaries of their reservation”
stating that courts must first “determine the focus of the Cabazon analysis” and then determine whether the conduct is generally permitted or prohibited
stating that the narrow conduct affected by a statute will be 7 analyzed apart from the broad conduct when the narrow conduct presents heightened public-policy concerns
stating that “[t]he Supreme Court has not established a per se rule prohibiting the exercise of state jurisdiction ... in the absence of an express congressional grant of jurisdiction”
describing “exceptional circumstances” in which a state may assert jurisdiction over the on-reservation activities of tribal members without an express federal grant of authority (quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Keith, Tomljanovich

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

35 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.