305 F. Supp. 3d 1040
D. Ariz.2018Background
- Plaintiff Charley Begay (now deceased; the estate is substituted) applied in 2005 for Navajo-Hopi Settlement Act relocation benefits, claiming legal residence on Hopi Partitioned Land (HPL) as of December 22, 1974.
- Initial application denied for lack of HPL residency; IHO upheld denial after hearing in 2008; case was remanded in 2010 and reheard in 2016 with additional testimony and a field investigation.
- Begay claimed a dual-use pattern: a homesite at Whitewater on Navajo Partitioned Land (NPL) and seasonal residence/planting at Old Branch on HPL, asserting a traditional/customary use area spanning the partition line.
- The BIA enumeration (roster) listed Begay only at Whitewater and showed no enumerated structures at Old Branch; IHO found Begay’s testimony partially not credible and relied in part on the BIA enumeration.
- IHO concluded Begay lacked manifest intent to reside at Old Branch by the partition date and that seasonal planting alone did not meet the agency’s traditional-use/residency standard; ONHIR issued final agency action denying benefits.
- District Court reviewed under the APA and affirmed ONHIR: agency decision was supported by substantial evidence, credibility findings were adequately explained, and agency precedent was followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Begay was a legal resident of HPL on Dec. 22, 1974 | Begay says seasonal use and planting at Old Branch plus traditional-use pattern establish residency spanning HPL/NPL | ONHIR says BIA enumeration, lack of a homesite at Old Branch, and inconsistent testimony show Begay relocated to Whitewater and lacked intent to reside at Old Branch | Court: Substantial evidence supports IHO; Begay not a legal HPL resident on the date |
| Whether seasonal planting/traditional-use can establish residency across partition | Begay: traditional/customary use areas can confer residency if continuously used | ONHIR: traditional-use recognized only when continual, active, substantial use and homesites exist on both sides; seasonal planting alone insufficient | Court: IHO applied agency precedent requiring substantial/continuous use and a homesite; decision upheld |
| Proper weight of BIA enumeration in residency determination | Begay: IHO over-relied on the BIA roster and should have discounted it given its limits | ONHIR: BIA enumeration is prima facie evidence of residency; IHO permissibly used it among other evidence | Court: BIA enumeration may be prima facie; IHO did not rely exclusively on it and permissibly credited it |
| Adequacy of IHO credibility findings | Begay: credibility findings lack adequate rationale | ONHIR: IHO gave specific, cogent reasons (memory problems, inconsistent testimony, witness availability) | Court: Credibility findings were articulated and supported by record; entitled to deference |
Key Cases Cited
- Bedoni v. Navajo-Hopi Indian Relocation Comm'n, 878 F.2d 1119 (9th Cir. 1989) (explains Settlement Act background and standards for agency review)
- Hopi Tribe v. Navajo Tribe, 46 F.3d 908 (9th Cir. 1995) (APA governs judicial review of ONHIR decisions)
- Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe, 401 U.S. 402 (1971) (articulates narrow "arbitrary and capricious" standard)
- Occidental Eng'g Co. v. INS, 753 F.2d 766 (9th Cir. 1985) (review is whether record permits the agency's decision)
- Gallant v. Heckler, 753 F.2d 1450 (9th Cir. 1984) (agency findings entitled to deference when multiple rational interpretations exist)
- Ranchers Cattlemen Action Legal Fund United Stockgrowers of Am. v. U.S. Dep't of Agric., 499 F.3d 1108 (9th Cir. 2007) (agency must articulate rational connection between facts and decision)
- Ceguerra v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 933 F.2d 735 (9th Cir. 1991) (ALJ must state record support for adverse credibility findings)
- De Valle v. INS, 901 F.2d 787 (9th Cir. 1990) (credibility findings receive substantial deference)
- Sarvia-Quintanilla v. U.S. INS, 767 F.2d 1387 (9th Cir. 1985) (ALJ uniquely positioned to evaluate witness demeanor and credibility)
- Akee v. ONHIR, 907 F. Supp. 315 (D. Ariz. 1995) (agency decisions denying benefits are not per se inconsistent with the Settlement Act when made in good faith and on substantial evidence)