Here is the order in Crist v. Nix (D.N.M.):
An excerpt:
Last, Crist also names the Sandia Pueblo Police Department as a Defendant. The Sandia Pueblo Police Department is not a “person” within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. There is no remedy against the Sandia Pueblo Police Department under § 1983 and the Complaint fails to state a claim for relief against the Sandia Pueblo Police Department Will v. Michigan Dep’t of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 63–64 (1989). In addition, although the Court does not reach the question, an issue exists as to whether Sandia Pueblo Tribal police officers act under color of state law and are subject to liability under § 1983. Compare Burrell v. Armijo, 456 F.3d 1159, 1174 (10th Cir. 2006) (tribal officers act under color of tribal law, not state law) and Evans v. McKay, 869 F.2d 1341, 1348–49 (9th Cir. 1989) (tribal officials acting in concert with state officials act under color of state law).
Turtle Talk 
I was the attorney in Evans v. McKay. it took two trip to 9CA as the district court dismissed the
case twice. The case set out clearly what was required to plead a Sec. l983 case in Montana.
Finally, a jury trial was held and the jury ruled in favor of the police on the false arrest claims etc.
Vance Gillette