COURT IN LANDMARK COBELL V. NORTON INDIAN TRUST SUIT
RULES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR MUST PROVIDE DETAILED NOTIFICATION OF RIGHTS BEFORE THE SALE OR TRANSFER OF LAND
For the first time in history, individual Indian landowners will be informed of their rights as trust beneficiaries and class members before the sale of their land; Court rules that each beneficiary who decides to sell trusts assets has an absolute right
WASHINGTON, DC (September 30, 2004)—In a major victory for the plaintiffs in the historic Cobell v. Norton Individual Indian Trust class action, U.S. federal district court judge Royce Lamberth ruled that all sales and transfers of Indian-owned land by the Department of the Interior (DOI) Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) must include a detailed, court-approved notification of the landowner’s rights as trust beneficiaries and class members.
In a decision dated September 29, 2004, the Court ruled that an attempted BIA auction of Indian-owned land in Oklahoma earlier this month violated a 2002 court order stating that DOI could not communicate with Cobell class members about matters relating to the trust or the litigation without prior approval of the Court. The Court found that the owners of some of the land that was scheduled to be auctioned were not fully informed of the consequences of such sales with respect to the lawsuit, and “in some cases it seems that the landowners may be fully unaware that their land is up for sale in the first place.”
The court’s ruling marks the first time in history that such notification has been required of BIA before the agency sells Indian land. At the turn of the century, more than 40 million acres of land were held in trust for individual Indian landowners by the U.S. government. Today, that amount is less than 11 million acres. No one in the U.S. government can explain how the trust assets were lost, or where the proceeds of the sale of the land went.
Elouise Cobell, lead plaintiff for more than 500,000 individual Indian landowners who are plaintiffs in the case, said: “For more than a century, the U.S. government has sold our land out from under us—without consent, without appraisal and without informing us of our rights as trust beneficiaries. That ends today.”
In his ruling, Judge Lamberth held that “any beneficiary who decides whether to sell trust land without being informed about this litigation and the accounting that Interior has been ordered to produce is always and already stripped of the very rights that the accounting was ordered to protect.”
“Trust beneficiaries ought not to have to make the decision to sell trust assets without access to all the relevant information,” Judge Lamberth ruled.
Keith Harper, attorney for the Plaintiffs, said: “We now have, in specific detail, rules for the transfer of Individual Indian land that will ensure that the seller understands his or her rights as class members and trust beneficiaries.”
Lamberth’s ruling also clearly establishes the principle that the government cannot compel a beneficiary to sell their land without a “full and accurate accounting, appraisal and other relevant information.” Lamberth ruled that each trust beneficiary has an absolute right to this information from their Trustee-delegate prior to making a decision to sell their trust asset.
“If the underlying rationale… is to facilitate informed decision making,” Judge Lamberth wrote, “then to allow beneficiaries to continue to make decisions that substantially alter their trust interests without information about this litigation and Interior’s obligations is to effectively rob those beneficiaries of the cash value of their rights.”
Judge Lamberth’s decision comes on the heels of the issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) stopping the BIA auction, which was set to take place on September 1, 2004. The plaintiffs had requested a permanent injunction until the Interior could show informed consent on the part of the landowners. Instead, in his latest ruling Judge Lamberth supplemented his 2002 order “to require that all communications between Interior and trust beneficiaries related to sales or exchanges of trust assets of any kind… include notice to class members regarding this litigation and Interior’s duties as Trustee-Delegate.”
The required notice that the Court ordered be sent to all individual landowners must be approved by the Court. According to Judge Lamberth’s ruling, the notice “might include, for example: (1) reasonable notice to the class members of the pendency of this litigation; (2) an adequate description of the nature of the pending claim; and (3) an adequate description of both the relief that has already been granted and that which the plaintiffs seek at the end of this litigation.”
The judge added: “The notice displayed on the communications must advise the class member of his or her right to consult with class counsel before making any decisions that affect his or her trust interest, and must allow the class members sufficient time in which to do so. The notice may also inform class members of their right to waive consultation with class counsel if they chose to do so. These rules shall govern all communications between Interior and class members that affect class members’ rights at issue in this litigation until this dispute is resolved.”
Indian Trust
For the latest updates and commentary, please see:
Indian Trust http://www.indiantrust.com
Please also see the Western Shoshone “Payoff” Bill in our Economics section and
Western Shoshone Defense Project http://www.wsdp.org
RULES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR MUST PROVIDE DETAILED NOTIFICATION OF RIGHTS BEFORE THE SALE OR TRANSFER OF LAND
For the first time in history, individual Indian landowners will be informed of their rights as trust beneficiaries and class members before the sale of their land; Court rules that each beneficiary who decides to sell trusts assets has an absolute right
WASHINGTON, DC (September 30, 2004)—In a major victory for the plaintiffs in the historic Cobell v. Norton Individual Indian Trust class action, U.S. federal district court judge Royce Lamberth ruled that all sales and transfers of Indian-owned land by the Department of the Interior (DOI) Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) must include a detailed, court-approved notification of the landowner’s rights as trust beneficiaries and class members.
In a decision dated September 29, 2004, the Court ruled that an attempted BIA auction of Indian-owned land in Oklahoma earlier this month violated a 2002 court order stating that DOI could not communicate with Cobell class members about matters relating to the trust or the litigation without prior approval of the Court. The Court found that the owners of some of the land that was scheduled to be auctioned were not fully informed of the consequences of such sales with respect to the lawsuit, and “in some cases it seems that the landowners may be fully unaware that their land is up for sale in the first place.”
The court’s ruling marks the first time in history that such notification has been required of BIA before the agency sells Indian land. At the turn of the century, more than 40 million acres of land were held in trust for individual Indian landowners by the U.S. government. Today, that amount is less than 11 million acres. No one in the U.S. government can explain how the trust assets were lost, or where the proceeds of the sale of the land went.
Elouise Cobell, lead plaintiff for more than 500,000 individual Indian landowners who are plaintiffs in the case, said: “For more than a century, the U.S. government has sold our land out from under us—without consent, without appraisal and without informing us of our rights as trust beneficiaries. That ends today.”
In his ruling, Judge Lamberth held that “any beneficiary who decides whether to sell trust land without being informed about this litigation and the accounting that Interior has been ordered to produce is always and already stripped of the very rights that the accounting was ordered to protect.”
“Trust beneficiaries ought not to have to make the decision to sell trust assets without access to all the relevant information,” Judge Lamberth ruled.
Keith Harper, attorney for the Plaintiffs, said: “We now have, in specific detail, rules for the transfer of Individual Indian land that will ensure that the seller understands his or her rights as class members and trust beneficiaries.”
Lamberth’s ruling also clearly establishes the principle that the government cannot compel a beneficiary to sell their land without a “full and accurate accounting, appraisal and other relevant information.” Lamberth ruled that each trust beneficiary has an absolute right to this information from their Trustee-delegate prior to making a decision to sell their trust asset.
“If the underlying rationale… is to facilitate informed decision making,” Judge Lamberth wrote, “then to allow beneficiaries to continue to make decisions that substantially alter their trust interests without information about this litigation and Interior’s obligations is to effectively rob those beneficiaries of the cash value of their rights.”
Judge Lamberth’s decision comes on the heels of the issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) stopping the BIA auction, which was set to take place on September 1, 2004. The plaintiffs had requested a permanent injunction until the Interior could show informed consent on the part of the landowners. Instead, in his latest ruling Judge Lamberth supplemented his 2002 order “to require that all communications between Interior and trust beneficiaries related to sales or exchanges of trust assets of any kind… include notice to class members regarding this litigation and Interior’s duties as Trustee-Delegate.”
The required notice that the Court ordered be sent to all individual landowners must be approved by the Court. According to Judge Lamberth’s ruling, the notice “might include, for example: (1) reasonable notice to the class members of the pendency of this litigation; (2) an adequate description of the nature of the pending claim; and (3) an adequate description of both the relief that has already been granted and that which the plaintiffs seek at the end of this litigation.”
The judge added: “The notice displayed on the communications must advise the class member of his or her right to consult with class counsel before making any decisions that affect his or her trust interest, and must allow the class members sufficient time in which to do so. The notice may also inform class members of their right to waive consultation with class counsel if they chose to do so. These rules shall govern all communications between Interior and class members that affect class members’ rights at issue in this litigation until this dispute is resolved.”
Indian Trust
For the latest updates and commentary, please see:
Indian Trust http://www.indiantrust.com
Please also see the Western Shoshone “Payoff” Bill in our Economics section and
Western Shoshone Defense Project http://www.wsdp.org