United States Sixth Circuit

In a dispute regarding the interpretation and enforcement of the 1836 Treaty of Washington, the district court properly denied the proposed intervenors' motion to intervene in the current phase of the case to determine the usufructuary rights of five Indian tribes under the Treaty.

Appellate Information

• Decided 09/20/2005
• Published 09/20/2005

Judges

• Before BOGGS, Chief Judge;  RYAN and ROGERS, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Stephen O. Schultz, Foster, Swift, Collins & Smith, Lansing, Michigan, for Appellants.  Kathryn E. Kovacs, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Marc D. Slonim, Ziontz, Chestnut, Varnell, Berley & Slonim, Seattle, Washington, for Appellees.   ON BRIEF:  Peter R. Albertins, Foster, Swift, Collins & Smith, Lansing, Michigan, for Appellants.  Kathryn E. Kovacs, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Marc D. Slonim, Brian C. Gruber, Ziontz, Chestnut, Varnell, Berley & Slonim, Seattle, Washington, Kathryn L. Tierney, Bay Mills Indian Community, Brimley, Michigan, Aaron C. Schlehuber, Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan, Bruce R. Greene, Greene, Meyer & McElroy, Boulder, Colorado, John F. Petoskey, Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa & Chippewa Indians, Peshawbestown, Michigan, William Rastetter, Olson, Bzdok & Howard, Traverse City, Michigan, William J. Brooks, Manistee, Michigan, James A. Bransky, Traverse City, Michigan, Allie Greenleaf Maldonado, Harbor Springs, Michigan, Marie Shamraj, Christopher D. Dobyns, Office of the Attorney General of Michigan, Lansaing, Michigan, for Appellees.