San Carlos Apache Tribe v. United States
639 F.3d 1346
| Fed. Cir. | 2011Background
- The Globe Equity Decree of 1935 allocated 6,000 acre-feet of Gila River water to the San Carlos Apache Tribe and barred new claims beyond the decree’s limits.
- The Decree explicitly states all rights are to be determined and that parties are enjoined from asserting rights except those decreed.
- Arizona adjudication later concluded that the Decree precluded aboriginal or Winters rights for the Tribe on the main stem but not necessarily on tributaries.
- In 2006, the Arizona Supreme Court held the Decree bound the Tribe and precluded Winters/aboriginal rights on the main stem, but did not review adequacy of U.S. representation.
- The Tribe filed a monetary-damages claim in the Court of Federal Claims in 2009, alleging breach of fiduciary duty by inadequate government representation; the claim was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction due to § 2501 six-year accrual.
- The primary issue is when the Tribe’s breach-of-fiduciary-duty claim accrued for § 2501 purposes.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| When did the claim accrue under § 2501? | Tribe argues accrual occurred in 2006 after Arizona Supreme Court decision. | Government argues accrual fixed in 1935 with Decree, six-year bar. | Accrual fixed in 1935; claim time-barred. |
| Does the Decree’s language bind the Tribe to preclude later claims? | Decree acknowledgments and representation issues show ongoing dispute. | Decree language objectively fixed rights and precluded further claims. | Yes—the Decree objectively fixed liability in 1935, precluding later claims. |
| Does Samish or similar precedent govern accrual here? | Samish requires a later element to accrue in another forum. | Samish not controlling; here Decree language fixed liability earlier. | Samish distinguishable; accrual occurred in 1935. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hopland Band of Pomo Indians v. United States, 855 F.2d 1573 (Fed.Cir.1988) (accrual tied to when liability becomes fixed and knowable)
- Samish Indian Nation v. United States, 419 F.3d 1355 (Fed.Cir.2005) (addressed final ruling as prerequisite to accrual in APA-related claims)
- Catawba Indian Tribe v. United States, 982 F.2d 1564 (Fed.Cir.1993) (accrual fixed by operative legal instrument; later rulings clarify, not create, liability)
- Fort Mojave Indian Tribe v. United States, 23 Cl.Ct.417 (Cl.Ct.1991) (accrual in trust-damages context can delay until final interpretive ruling)
- Navajo Nation v. United States, 631 F.3d 1268 (Fed.Cir.2011) (proper focus on defendant's acts for accrual, not later consequences)