Keeping Tribal Business Partners Close – And Their Lawyers Closer

7 Pages Posted: 19 Jan 2012

Date Written: January 19, 2012

Abstract

Tribes, in appropriate instances, should ensure that their non-Indian business partners have engaged attorneys that are familiar with the fundamental principles of Indian law. Although this strategy may seem counterintuitive, a tribal party should pause during the deal to consider the old adage that “bad facts make for bad law,” while also accepting that commercial disputes are inevitable, especially in modern economic times. The tribal party should also pause to consider that it is increasingly appropriate to litigate these disputes on the merits, rather than bank on seeking a quick dismissal on Indian jurisdictional grounds – a dismissal that will very likely result in appeal. There is great potential that the appellate courts will force an exception to a sovereignty-based affirmative defense – and that the exception could swallow the rule. This proverb is particularly true for commercially successful tribes, where the perception of big-business/small-entrepreneur inequality is even more likely to drive bad results in the courts, and in the court of public opinion. Accordingly, the parties and their lawyers should ensure clarity and understanding regarding the various issues of tribal jurisdiction and federal Indian law that are implicated in Indian Country commercial transactions.

Suggested Citation

Dreveskracht, Ryan D., Keeping Tribal Business Partners Close – And Their Lawyers Closer (January 19, 2012). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1988376 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1988376

Ryan D. Dreveskracht (Contact Author)

University of Washington ( email )

Seattle, WA 98195
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
42
Abstract Views
587
PlumX Metrics