翻訳と辞書
Words near each other
・ United States v. Mitchell (1983)
・ United States v. Montgomery County Board of Education
・ United States v. Montoya De Hernandez
・ United States v. Moore
・ United States v. More
・ United States v. Moreland
・ United States v. Morgan
・ United States v. Morlang
・ United States v. Morris
・ United States v. Morris (1991)
・ United States v. Morrison
・ United States v. Mueller
・ United States v. Munoz-Flores
・ United States v. National Treasury Employees Union
・ United States v. Navajo Nation
United States v. Navajo Nation (2009)
・ United States v. Nice
・ United States v. Ninety-Five Barrels Alleged Apple Cider Vinegar
・ United States v. Nixon
・ United States v. Nosal
・ United States v. O'Brien
・ United States v. O'Hagan
・ United States v. O'Hara
・ United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative
・ United States v. Olano
・ United States v. Olofson
・ United States v. One Book Called Ulysses
・ United States v. One Package of Japanese Pessaries
・ United States v. Oppenheimer
・ United States v. Oregon


Dictionary Lists
翻訳と辞書 辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ]
スポンサード リンク

United States v. Navajo Nation (2009) : ウィキペディア英語版
United States v. Navajo Nation (2009)

United States v. Navajo Nation 556 U.S. 287 is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Navajo Nation initiated proceedings in the Court of Federal Claims alleging that when they sought the assistance of the United States Secretary of the Interior to renegotiate their original leasing agreement with the Peabody Coal Company in 1984, a procedural process defined by the 1964 Indian Mineral Leasing Act (IMLA) of 1938, the United States Secretary of the Interior had been improperly influenced by the coal company, and as a result, had breached his fiduciary duty to the Nation when he approved the 1987 lease amendments.
== Background ==
The Indian Mineral Leasing Act (IMLA) of 1938 was brought to the attention of the Navajo people in 1964 when the Navajo Nation entered into an agreement with a third party to lease a substantial portion of Navajo land for coal mining. The Navajo Nation complained that the United States acted in the interests of a coal mining company, and not in the interests of the Navajo Nation, when negotiating the rate of royalty payments owed on coal mined from Navajo land. The Court of Federal Claims dismissed the complaint, ruling that although the United States had breached its fiduciary obligations to the Navajo Nation, this breach was not actionable because the United States did not have a trust relationship with the Navajo Nation and monetary relief was not available. The court of appeals reversed, holding (1) that a trust relationship existed and exists with the Navajo Nation, and (2) monetary damages are an available remedy for breach of this trust.

抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア(Wikipedia)
ウィキペディアで「United States v. Navajo Nation (2009)」の詳細全文を読む



スポンサード リンク
翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース

Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.