Vann v. Salazar
883 F. Supp. 2d 44
D.D.C.2011Background
- Freedmen sue Interior, Cherokee Nation officials, and Chief Crittenden over citizenship and voting rights under the Treaty of 1866 and related laws.
- Vann II held tribal immunity barred joinder of the Cherokee Nation without its consent; Ex parte Young allowed suits against tribal officers.
- Cherokee Nation filed related Nash action; Freedmen sought to add Nation as defendant in this case (fifth amended complaint).
- Court previously held the Cherokee Nation is a necessary party under Rule 19(a); sovereign immunity may bar absence without waiver.
- Freedmen move to file fifth amended complaint; Nation argues immunity and potential lack of waiver; district court considers Rule 19(b) factors.
- Court concludes Nation’s absence would prejudice and cannot be adequately bound byjudgment; Nation did not waive immunity; dismisses without prejudice to Nation; fifth amendment denied; related motions denied as moot.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether case may proceed without Cherokee Nation under Rule 19(b) | Freedmen argue no need for Nation’s joinder. | Crittenden argues Nation indispensable; immunity blocks proceeding without Nation. | Proceeding without Nation not allowed; dismiss. |
| Whether relief could be adequate without binding Nation | Relief against officers suffices without Nation. | Only Nation can resolve membership and election issues; absence prejudicial. | Judgment without Nation inadequate; dismissal favored. |
| Whether Freedmen’s fifth amendment/waiver theory permits joining Nation | Nation waived immunity by filing Nash; subject matter waiver. | Waiver not clear; separate forums can apply; Lapides not controlling here. | No clear waiver; amendment futile; denied. |
| Whether Nash provides an adequate alternative forum | Nash offers forum for identical issues. | Nash binds Nation as plaintiff; supports dismissal. | Nash provides adequate, superior forum; favor dismissal. |
| Whether public rights exception applies to Rule 19 | Public rights justify avoiding joinder. | Not applicable; not broad public interest; Nation joinder central. | Public rights exception does not apply; dismissal sustained. |
Key Cases Cited
- Republic of Philippines v. Pimentel, 553 U.S. 851 (2008) (Rule 19(b) factors guide equitable dismissal)
- Kickapoo Tribe v. Babbitt, 43 F.3d 1491 (D.C. Cir. 1995) (weight of immunity and prejudice considerations)
- Davis ex rel. Davis v. United States, 343 F.3d 1282 (10th Cir. 2003) (prejudice and remedies when absent party is immune)
- Lapides v. Bd. of Regents, 535 U.S. 613 (2002) (voluntary removal and waiver implications)
- Okla. Tax Comm'n v. Citizen Band Potawatomi Indian Tribe, 498 U.S. 505 (1991) (tribal immunity and waivers; forum choice)