Court case

Cobell v. Salazar (individual Indian trust litigation)

The D.C. Circuit agreed Interior breached its duty to account for Indian trust money but vacated the district court's remedy.

Citation
573 F.3d 808 (D.C. Cir. 2009)
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Cir.
Year
2009
Nations
Individual Indian trust beneficiaries (class; lead plaintiff Elouise Cobell, Blackfeet)
Treaty at issue
none
Effect on land rights
mixed

What happened

In 1996, beneficiaries of Individual Indian Money (IIM) trust accounts brought a class action against the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of the Treasury and the Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs. The lead appellant was Elouise Pepion Cobell. The bulk of the trust assets, the court explained, are the proceeds of transactions in land allotted to individual Indians under the General Allotment Act of 1887, known as the Dawes Act.

The class relied on the American Indian Trust Fund Management Reform Act of 1994, which requires the Secretary of the Interior to account for the funds. After years of litigation, the district court held the Department in continuing breach of its duty to account for trust funds, held that a full accounting was impossible, and ordered monetary relief to the class.

On appeal, the D.C. Circuit agreed with much of that. It held that "while the district court's analysis of duty and breach are generally correct, the court erred in freeing the Department of the Interior from its burden to make an accounting." The court said that without an accounting it is impossible to know who is owed what. It vacated the district court's orders and sent the case back.

The litigation ended in a settlement. Interior says Congress approved the Cobell settlement on November 30, 2010, and that it totals $3.4 billion: $1.9 billion for a trust land consolidation fund and $1.5 billion in direct payments to class members.

Summarized with AI assistance from 3 sources and checked against their words; not yet reviewed by historians or by the nations. Report an error

What the sources say, and how this was checked

Well supported by the sources below.

  1. the court erred in freeing the Department of the Interior from its burden to make an accountingCobell v. Salazar, 573 F.3d 808 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (CourtListener)
  2. without an accounting, it is impossible to know who is owed whatCobell v. Salazar, 573 F.3d 808 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (CourtListener)
  3. The $3.4 billion Cobell settlement includes a $1.9 billion trust land consolidation fund and $1.5 billion in direct payments to class members.Consultations on Cobell Trust Land Consolidation (U.S. Department of the Interior)

Research notes. The opinion says the beneficiaries filed in 1996 and names Elouise Pepion Cobell as lead appellant; it does not describe her as Blackfeet, so that is omitted. The settlement figures are from Interior's page, which says the settlement was approved by Congress on November 30, 2010 (Claims Resolution Act of 2010) and signed on December 8, 2010. The opinion is the D.C. Circuit's 2009 decision (July 24, 2009).

Who is doing the work

Native legal and land defense, nationally

Gifts go straight to each organization; this atlas takes nothing. Listing is not endorsement: how organizations are listed.

Connections

Links marked “suggested” were matched automatically by name or date and have not yet been reviewed by a person.

Doctrine applied 4

Policy era 1

Answered by 1

Sources

  1. doi.gov/news/pressreleases/salazar-announces-final-steps-on-cobell-litigation-and-implemenself-description
The record’s fields
Holding
Vacated a $455.6 million award; the class action begun in 1996 ended in a $3.4 billion settlement funded by the Claims Resolution Act of 2010, approved Aug. 4, 2011 and final Nov. 24, 2012, including a $1.9 billion Land Consolidation Fund.
Kind
Court case
Confidence
High

Correct this record