Narrative Opinion Summary
Alvino Lucero, Juan B. Abeita, and Josephine Fisher, members of the Isleta Pueblo Tribal Council, appealed a district court order dismissing their lawsuit due to the non-joinder of an indispensable party, specifically the Pueblo of Isleta. The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the case without oral argument and affirmed the district court's decision, citing that the dismissal was appropriate due to the failure to join the necessary party. The ruling is noted to have no precedential value within the Tenth Circuit except for specific legal doctrines such as the law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. The court's decision was made under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and the appeal was handled by Circuit Judges Stephen H. Anderson and Carolyn B. Tacha, along with District Court Judge H. Dale Cook, sitting by designation.
Legal Issues Addressed
Affirmation of Lower Court Decisionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's dismissal, agreeing with the lower court's decision regarding the non-joinder of an indispensable party.
Reasoning: The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the case without oral argument and affirmed the district court's decision, citing that the dismissal was appropriate due to the failure to join the necessary party.
Dismissal for Non-Joinder of an Indispensable Partysubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court dismissed the lawsuit due to the failure to join the Pueblo of Isleta, which was deemed an indispensable party in the case.
Reasoning: Alvino Lucero, Juan B. Abeita, and Josephine Fisher, members of the Isleta Pueblo Tribal Council, appealed a district court order dismissing their lawsuit due to the non-joinder of an indispensable party, specifically the Pueblo of Isleta.
Jurisdiction Under 28 U.S.C. § 1291subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate jurisdiction for this case was established under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, which governs final decisions of district courts.
Reasoning: The court's decision was made under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and the appeal was handled by Circuit Judges Stephen H. Anderson and Carolyn B. Tacha, along with District Court Judge H. Dale Cook, sitting by designation.
Precedential Value of the Decisionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court's decision explicitly states that it holds no precedential value within the Tenth Circuit, except for specific legal doctrines.
Reasoning: The ruling is noted to have no precedential value within the Tenth Circuit except for specific legal doctrines such as the law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.