ALLTEL COMMUNICATIONS, LLC v. DeJORDY, 675 F.3d 1100

Alltel sued former senior VP Eugene DeJordy in Arkansas for breach of a Separation Agreement and alleged acts assisting the Oglala Sioux Tribe in a tribal-court suit against Alltel.
Alltel served District of South Dakota third-party subpoenas on the Oglala Sioux Tribe and Joseph Red Cloud seeking documents linking DeJordy to the Tribe's suit.
The Arkansas district court denied the Tribe's motion to quash based on tribal immunity and ordered production for in camera review.
The Tribe and Red Cloud appealed interlocutorily under the collateral order doctrine and 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b).
The central question is whether tribal immunity bars enforcement of third-party subpoenas in private civil litigation, a question the panel reviews de novo.
The court held that tribal immunity bars the third-party subpoenas, reversing the district court.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether third-party subpoenas in private civil litigation constitute a 'suit' triggering tribal immunity	Alltel contends immunity does not bar third-party subpoenas	Tribe argues tribal immunity bars enforcement of the subpoenas	Yes; a third-party subpoena is a 'suit' triggering tribal immunity

United States v. Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians, 827 F.2d 380 (8th Cir. 1987) (tribal sovereign immunity recognized)
Kiowa Tribe of Oklahoma v. Manufacturing Techs., Inc., 523 U.S. 751 (U.S. 1998) (immunity broad and principled on federal policy)
Okla. Tax Comm'n v. Potawatomi Indian Tribe of Oklahoma, 498 U.S. 505 (U.S. 1991) (immunity applies to activities outside reservation; federal law governs)
Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S. 49 (U.S. 1978) (federal policy supporting tribal self-government)
Dugan v. Rank, 372 U.S. 609 (U.S. 1963) (defining limits of sovereign immunity and relief against the sovereign)
Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. (19 U.S.) 264 (U.S. 1821) (early articulation of the )