Supreme Court to Hear Tribal Immunity Case

The nation’s high court will hear a case involving sovereign tribal immunity that has been extended to a tribal employee whose actions allegedly severely injured two people as he was driving a tribal vehicle off the reservation. What makes this case different is that the plaintiffs are suing the driver, not the tribe.

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear the issue of whether tribal sovereign immunity from lawsuit extends to a tribal employee, who was not a member of the tribe and who was not on tribal land when he was involved in a car accident that badly injured two people.

A lower court previously ruled that two people, Brian and Michelle Lewis, injured when a vehicle driven by an intoxicated limousine driver, William Clarke, of the Mohegan Sun slammed into their car in Norwalk, about 70 miles from the Mohegans’ casino.

The courts have consistently upheld the notion of tribal sovereignty and sovereign immunity within the boundaries of the reservation. It is generally held to apply to employees of tribes acting in their official capacity. What makes this case different is that the driver was being sued as an individual. Although the Lewises initially included the tribe in their lawsuit, they dropped it when they concluded that the tribe had immunity.

In denying that claim the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled, “The doctrine of tribal immunity extends to individual tribal officials acting in their representative capacity and within the scope of their authority.”

In their appeal the Lewises’ attorneys point to a case when a federal court of appeals allowed the family of a shooting victim to sue tribal paramedics as individuals for allegedly denying medical treatment. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in that instance that the lawsuit was allowed because the paramedics would be paying the damages themselves, and none of it would come from the tribe.

The Connecticut court declined to follow that precedent, claiming that the two cases were different.

Clarke has argued that the plaintiffs should proceed by suing him in tribal court since the tribe has adopted the state’s civil law code, except where it conflicts with tribal law.

Since the Supreme Court is currently without a ninth member it is possible that it won’t be able to render a verdict since earlier this year it voted 4-4 on a case challenging the jurisdiction of a tribal court in Mississippi.