Cedarville Rancheria Prevails in Tribal Exhaustion Matter

Here are the materials in Knighton v. Cedarville Rancheria of Northern Paiute Indians (E.D. Cal.):

1 Complaint

10 Motion to Dismiss

14 Opposition

15 Reply

17 DCT Order

An excerpt:

Plaintiff Duanna Knighton, the former Tribal Administrator for defendant Cedarville Rancheria of Northern Paiute Indians (“the Tribe”), seeks declaratory and injunctive relief against the Tribe, Cedarville Rancheria Tribal Court (“Tribal Court”), and Tribal Court Judge Patricia R. Lenzi (“Tribal Judge Lenzi”) (collectively “defendants”) to avoid Tribal Court jurisdiction over claims that she defrauded the Tribe and breached her fiduciary duties to it. Defendants move to dismiss Knighton’s complaint because the Tribal Court has jurisdiction. I agree that it has both regulatory and adjudicative authority over its former employee under the facts alleged; accordingly, it has subject matter jurisdiction. Defendants’ motion is GRANTED WITH PREJUDICE.


This entry was posted in Author: Matthew L.M. Fletcher, Research, tribal courts and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.