FOLLOW US

In a surprising turn of events, an Idaho federal judge, Amanda K. Brailsford, has reinstated two Quiet Title Act claims made by the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes of the Fort Hall Reservation against the federal government. This decision comes amid a heated dispute over land formerly utilized by a railway. The judge's ruling stems from a recent Supreme Court decision, injecting a burst of uncertainty into the legal proceedings.

Supreme Court's Impact on Railroad Dispute

U.S. District Judge Brailsford, acknowledging the implications of the Supreme Court's 6-3 decision in Wilkins v. United States last March, agreed that the Quiet Title Act's 12-year statute of limitations is a procedural rule rather than a strict jurisdictional constraint. This ruling mandated a reconsideration of the dismissal of the tribes' claims, breathing new life into Counts V and VI of the lawsuit.

"This holding reversed the precedent the court relied on in its December 2021 decision and renders the dismissal of Counts V and VI clearly erroneous," stated Judge Brailsford in an order issued on Monday.

Ejectment Claim Denied, Multiple Decisions Remain Unaltered

Despite the revival of certain claims, the judge denied the tribes' attempt to reinstate an ejectment claim against the Bureau of Land Management. Emphasizing that the Supreme Court had not overturned the Block v. North Dakota precedent, Judge Brailsford maintained that the Quiet Title Act remains the exclusive avenue to challenge the United States' title to real property.

The judge also declined to certify several earlier decisions for interlocutory appeal, indicating that some issues raised by the tribes were now mooted with the reinstatement of key claims.

Court Will Rethink Tribes' Claims In Railroad Dispute : Allegations of Unlawful Land Transactions

The legal battle dates back to 2018 when the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes initiated a lawsuit against the federal government and other entities. The tribes contend that the federal government was complicit in Union Pacific Railroad Co.'s alleged improper sale or lease of land parcels, a violation of acts passed in the 1880s. The acts required the return of the land to the tribes once it was no longer used for railroad purposes.

Court records reveal that the tribes recently moved to file a second amended complaint, intending to expand their legal arsenal by asserting violations of the "Bad Man" provisions in the Fort Bridger Treaty of 1868.

Court Will Rethink Tribes' Claims In Railroad Dispute : Ongoing Legal Developments

While the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes and Union Pacific Railroad declined to comment, representatives for other involved parties were unavailable for immediate comment.

The legal showdown is far from over, with the tribes represented by William F. Bacon, Monte Gray, Mark A. Echo Hawk, and Joseph T. Preston. The federal government is represented by Todd Kim, Shaun M. Pettigrew, and Amanda K. Rudat, while Union Pacific Railroad Co. is defended by Julianne P. Blanch, Lee Radford, and John E. Cutler. The city of Pocatello is represented by Blake G. Hall.