United States v. Cayuga Nation of Indians

“For the reasons stated in the dissent in United States v. Oneida Nation of New York, supra, while agreeing to the remand, we would require that the Federal Government have actual notice of the applicable treaties, and, further, before any liability could attach to the United States, that findings show timely express complaint by the Indians to the United States, Seneca Nation v. United States, 173 Ct. Ct. 912, 916 (1965), and a causal connection between their alleged deprivation and the actions of the United States. Lipan Apache Tribe v. United States, 180 Ct. Cl. 487, 502 (1967).”

Indians claims; Indian land sales to New York State; unconscionable consideration; Federal Government knowledge, actual or constructive, of treaties. — On June 29, 1973 the court issued the following order:

“This case comes before the court on defendant’s appeal from the Indian Claims Commission filed November 13,1972 for relief from a decision of said Commission [28 Ind. Cl. Comm. 237], having been submitted on oral argument of counsel and the oppositions and responses of the parties. Upon consideration thereof,

“IT IS ORDERED that the case be remanded to the Indian Claims Commission to decide the case in light of the standards delineated in United States v. Oneida Nation of New York, 201 Ct. Cl. 546, 477 F. 2d 939 (1973), including *1104whether the Federal Government had knowledge of the applicable treaties between the Indians and the State of New York.”