- Tribal-State Forums
- Cooperative Agreements
- Legislation/Policy/Procedure
- Joint Jurisdiction Courts
- Other
Legislation/Policy/Procedure
Date enacted/published: 2004
Description:
A Legacy of Public Law 280: Comparing and Contrasting Minnesota’s New Rule for the Recognition of Tribal Court Judgments with the Recent Arizona Rule by Kevin K. Washburn and Chloe Thompson, Vol. 31, Issue 2, Article 5, William Mitchell Law Review 2004. The article provides a history of the tribal/state court forums in Arizona and in Minnesota. It contrast the rules adopted in each state involving the recognition of tribal court judgments and contemplates why such different rules were adopted. It concludes that the impact of P.L. 280 on the relationship between state and tribes had a major impact on the resulting rule in Minnesota and that the strong leadership in the Arizona Supreme Court impacted the adoption there.
For additional information contact:Kevin K. Washburn
Dean, School of Law
University of New Mexico
washburn@law.umn.edu
Parties: Tribal courts
Date enacted/published: pending
Description:
Tribal court domestic relations orders cannot divided tax-exempt retirement plans established pursuant to 26 USC §401, et seq. As a result, tribal members obtaining a divorce through their tribal court, often the only forum jurisdictionally available to them, are unable to get an equitable division of their retirement plans, an often sizable community asset. Non-members married to tribal members may also be unable to obtain a division of their retirement plans. Instead, persons divorced in tribal court may be required to cash in their plans and lose the tax benefits of keeping the plan until retirement. This fact sheet recommends that the federal law be amended to add tribal court orders to the statute.
For additional information contact:Administrative Office of the Courts
Legal Services Office
1501 West Washington • Suite 414
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
Phone 602.542.9323
Parties: Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation, State of Arizona and other AZ Tribes
Description:
Project Passport encourages the adoption of a recognizable first page (with standardized, common elements and format), known as the Passport Model Template First Page, for domestic violence orders of protection across jurisdictions. This standardization facilitates broader recognition and enforcement of orders of protection across tribal and state jurisdictions. The Passport Model Template First Page presents commonly agreed-upon data elements in a standardized format. By making the essential data readily available and easily recognizable on an order of protection, courts can be more confident that a “foreign protection order” (i.e., a protection order issued in another jurisdiction outside of the enforcing jurisdiction) is authentic, valid, and enforceable, and that the presenting parties at the point of enforcement are properly identified. Major elements such as the identity of the respondent, relationship of the parties to the order, expiration date of the order, and weapon information all appear in an easily recognized format on the first page of the protection order.
For additional information contact:Denise Dancy, Research Associate
National Center for State Courts
300 Newport Avenue
Williamsburg, VA 23185
Telephone: (757) 259-1593
ddancy@ncsc.org
www.ncsc.org
Parties: Yavapai-Apache Nation, State of AZ, Other AZ tribes
Description:
Project Passport encourages the adoption of a recognizable first page (with standardized, common elements and format), known as the Passport Model Template First Page, for domestic violence orders of protection across jurisdictions. This standardization facilitates broader recognition and enforcement of orders of protection across tribal and state jurisdictions. The Passport Model Template First Page presents commonly agreed-upon data elements in a standardized format. By making the essential data readily available and easily recognizable on an order of protection, courts can be more confident that a “foreign protection order” (i.e., a protection order issued in another jurisdiction outside of the enforcing jurisdiction) is authentic, valid, and enforceable, and that the presenting parties at the point of enforcement are properly identified. Major elements such as the identity of the respondent, relationship of the parties to the order, expiration date of the order, and weapon information all appear in an easily recognized format on the first page of the protection order.
Denise Dancy, Research Associate
National Center for State Courts
300 Newport Avenue
Williamsburg, VA 23185
Telephone: (757) 259-1593
ddancy@ncsc.org
www.ncsc.org
Parties: Arizona courts
Date enacted/published: proposed
Description:
Arizona Federal, State, and Tribal Court Forum sought to amend the state’s rules related to service of process in Indian Country. An April 2006 memo explained the reasons why service in Indian country in Arizona should be the same as service out of state.
For additional information contact:David Withey
dwithey@courts.az.gov
State, Tribal and Federal Court Forum
Arizona Judicial Branch
Parties: Arizona tribal courts, Arizona courts
Date enacted/published: 2009
Description:
The protocol, supported by the Federal, State, and Tribal Forum in Arizona, is designed to streamline and decrease the time required to file and enforce tribal involuntary commitment orders. It specifically outlines what the tribal courts and state courts should do to expedite enforcement of the tribal order.
For additional information contact:Lydia Hubbard-Pourier
Tribal Contract Administrator
Arizona Department of Health Services
150 North 18th Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85007
(602) 364-4755
Lydia.Hubbard-Pourier@azdhs.gov
Parties: Arizona tribal courts, Arizona courts
Date enacted/published: 1994, amended 2002
Description:
Rules of Procedure for Arizona courts to follow in enforcing involuntary commitment orders from tribal courts. These rules were supported by the Federal, State and Tribal Court Forum. The rules provide for the filing of tribal orders in state courts without fee, establishes the standard of review to be used by state courts, lists the findings and information required to be included in the tribal order, establishes the response period for objections and provides the required forms. Amendments to the rules continue to be discussed at forum meetings.The education committee is developing a training model on commitment order procedures.
For additional information contact:David Withey
dwithey@courts.az.gov
State, Tribal and Federal Court Forum
Arizona Judicial Branch
Parties: Arizona tribal courts, Arizona courts
Description:
The Arizona Supreme Court Rules of Procedure that govern the recognition of tribal court orders by Arizona courts. Tribal court orders filed with the state shall be enforced as if an order of the state, provided notice is given to the party and no objection based on lack of subject matter or personal jurisdiction, lack of due process, or a few other permissible objections are substantiated.
For additional information contact:David Withey
Arizona Administrative Office of the Courts
1501 West Washington St # 411
Phoenix, AZ 85007-3235
(602) 452-3500
dwithey@courts.az.gov
Parties: Arizona tribal courts, Arizona courts
Date enacted/published: 1994
Description:
Criminal statute supported by the Federal, State, and Tribal Court Forum on procedure required by the state of Arizona to extradite an Indian from Indian jurisdiction or required by a tribe to extradite from state jurisdiction to tribal jurisdiction.
For additional information contact:David Withey
dwithey@courts.az.gov
State, Tribal and Federal Court Forum
Arizona Judicial Branch
