The Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit reaffirmed the rule that an unincorporated Indian tribe cannot sue or be sued in Federal Court on the basis of diversity jurisdiction. In Miccosukee Tribe v. Krus-Anderson Const., 2010 WL 2138957, the tribe entered into contracts with Krus-Anderson who construct several buildings on the tribe’s reservation with respect to contract disputes the contact provided that the tribe would waive its sovereign immunity only if Krus-Anderson agreed to use the Tribal Court as the forum for resolving contract disputes. Disputes did arise including contentions by the tribe that the company had over charged for the work and that it had failed to remedy several construction defects. Parties were unable to resolve their differences and the contractor filed a complaint against the in the Tribal Court alleging that $7,077,604.70 was due to it. The tribe counterclaimed and after at 16-day bench trial the Tribal Court denied Kraus-Anderson’s claim and awarded the Tribe judgment in the sum of $1,654,998.88.
Krus-Anderson did not pay any portion of the judgment and the tribe sued in the United States District Court to enforce the Tribal Court’s judgment. The complaint alleged a number of grounds for federal jurisdiction. The District Court granted Krus-Anderson a summary judgment on some of the jurisdictional grounds and also held that the judgment should not be given comity because Krus-Anderson had not been allowed to appeal by the Business Council.
The Appellate Court said it had to first decide whether it had subject matter jurisdiction. It held that it did not, dismissed the appeal on that basis and said that contrary to the District Court’s holding the parties did not present any basis for subject matter jurisdiction. It reversed and remanded the case with direction to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. One of the grounds alleged for subject matter jurisdiction was diversity. The Court of Appeals pointed out that the majority view, held by every Court of Appeals that has addressed the issue, is that unincorporated Indian tribes cannot sue or be sued in diversity under 28 U.S.C. 1332(a)(1) because they are not citizens of any state.