Coeur d'Alene Tribe v. Johnson

Summary

The Idaho Supreme Court considered whether to recognize and enforce a Coeur d’Alene Tribal Court default judgment against nonmember landowners concerning an unpermitted dock and pilings. The court overruled its prior holding that tribal judgments receive full faith and credit under 28 U.S.C. § 1738, instead holding that recognition is governed by comity. It affirmed recognition of the Tribe’s declaratory right to remove the encroachment but held that the $17,400 civil penalty was barred by the penal law rule, and remanded for an amended judgment.

Holdings

1. Tribal court judgments are not entitled to full faith and credit under 28 U.S.C. § 1738. Sheppard v. Sheppard is overruled to the extent it held otherwise.
2. Idaho courts will generally recognize and enforce tribal judgments under comity, provided that the tribal court had personal and subject matter jurisdiction and the defendant received due process. Recognition may also be denied on equitable grounds identified in Wilson.
3. The party attacking the validity of a tribal court judgment bears the burden of proving its invalidity.
4. The exhaustion of tribal remedies doctrine did not apply because no litigation remained pending in the Tribal Court when the Tribe sought state-court recognition of the final judgment.
5. The Johnsons failed to establish that the Tribal Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction. Tribal ownership of the riverbed was dispositive under the circumstances because the activity occurred on tribal land and no competing state interest weighed against tribal jurisdiction.
6. The Johnsons received due process because they had notice of the tribal proceedings and multiple opportunities to be heard, and they failed to show that the Tribal Court was biased.
7. The $17,400 civil penalty was not enforceable under comity because the penal law rule bars courts from enforcing another sovereign's penal laws. The declaratory portion recognizing the Tribe's right to remove the dock and pilings was enforceable.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Idaho Supreme Court should overrule Sheppard v. Sheppard and hold that tribal judgments are not entitled to full faith and credit under 28 U.S.C. § 1738.
2. What standards govern Idaho recognition and enforcement of tribal judgments.
3. Whether the exhaustion of tribal remedies doctrine barred the Johnsons from collaterally challenging the Tribal Court's jurisdiction.
4. Whether the Tribal Court had personal and subject matter jurisdiction over the Johnsons and the dock and pilings.
5. Whether the Johnsons were afforded due process in the tribal proceedings.
6. Whether the penal law rule barred recognition and enforcement of the $17,400 civil penalty while permitting recognition of the Tribe's declaratory right to remove the dock and pilings.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded