25 Cited authorities

  1. Bryan v. Itasca County

    426 U.S. 373 (1976)   Cited 431 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a state could not impose a tax on reservation Indians absent congressional intent and that § 1360 did not confer the power to tax
  2. Cotton Petroleum Corp. v. New Mexico

    490 U.S. 163 (1989)   Cited 184 times
    Holding that the state's regulation of oil-well spacing and integrity meant that federal regulation, while extensive, was not exclusive
  3. S.R.A., Inc. v. Minnesota

    327 U.S. 558 (1946)   Cited 162 times
    Finding that a private entity which obtained ownership of the beneficial interest in property pursuant to an executory contract was not exempt from state property taxes simply because the United States retained legal title of the property in question
  4. Humble Pipe Line Co. v. Waggonner

    376 U.S. 369 (1964)   Cited 72 times
    Holding that the federal government did not lose the exclusive jurisdiction it acquired in 1930 over a federal enclave via cession by the state of Louisiana, when United States "leased [to a private company] the right to exploit parts of the reservation for oil and gas and for an oil pipe-line"
  5. Collins v. Yosemite Park Co.

    304 U.S. 518 (1938)   Cited 143 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Collins, we held that the Twenty-first Amendment did not give the States the power to regulate the use of alcohol within a national park over which the Federal Government had exclusive jurisdiction.
  6. City of Roseville v. Norton

    219 F. Supp. 2d 130 (D.D.C. 2002)   Cited 40 times
    Holding agency satisfied 40 C.F.R. § 1506.5-(b) where record showed contractor worked with agency employees on EA and included "extensive copies of email communications between the agency staff discussing their comments on, and edits of, the EA"
  7. Volk v. United States

    57 F. Supp. 2d 888 (N.D. Cal. 1999)   Cited 42 times
    Affirming conviction under 36 C.F.R. § 4.23 and 36 C.F.R. § 4.23 where results of nystagmus tests were not offered at trial but other field sobriety tests were administered and trial court held "that the evidence of the [breathalyzer] test results combined with Officer West's observations demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that he had committed the offenses"
  8. Gila River Indian Community v. Henningson, Durham & Richardson

    626 F.2d 708 (9th Cir. 1980)   Cited 56 times
    Holding that state contract law governs breach of contract action between private citizen and Indian tribe
  9. Fort Leavenworth R.R. Co. v. Lowe

    114 U.S. 525 (1885)   Cited 266 times
    Finding the federal government had jurisdiction over Fort Leavenworth despite not purchasing the underlying land
  10. Standard Oil Co. v. California

    291 U.S. 242 (1934)   Cited 63 times
    Holding "it seems plain that by the act of 1897 California surrendered every possible claim of right to exercise legislative authority within the Presidio — put that area beyond the field of operation of her laws."
  11. Section 1391 - Venue generally

    28 U.S.C. § 1391   Cited 27,989 times   197 Legal Analyses
    Finding that venue lies where a "substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim" occurred
  12. Section 1360 - State civil jurisdiction in actions to which Indians are parties

    28 U.S.C. § 1360   Cited 453 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Granting broad civil and criminal jurisdiction to California, Minnesota, Nebraska, Oregon, and Wisconsin
  13. Section 1442 - Strict interpretation of condition involving forfeiture

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1442   Cited 133 times   1 Legal Analyses

    A condition involving a forfeiture must be strictly interpreted against the party for whose benefit it is created. Ca. Civ. Code § 1442 Enacted 1872.

  14. Section 113 - Consent to retrocession of jurisdiction of lands by United States

    Cal. Gov. Code § 113   Cited 6 times

    The Legislature, acting through the State Lands Commission, hereby consents to the retrocession of jurisdiction by the United States over land within this state upon and subject to each and all of the following express conditions: (a) The United States must in writing have requested state acceptance of the retrocession, and unless there is an officer of the United States empowered by a United States statute to retrocede jurisdiction, the request shall be by the act of Congress. The retrocession may