On to the troubling "journalistic" details...
In <199509022312.SAA11626@galaxy.galstar.com> cwyob@galaxy.galstar.com
(cherokee observer) writes:
The article is not attributed to a specific writier. This is therefore
either a statement of editorial posiiton by the CO, or something else.
In any event, one does not know _who_ is the author.
> MANKILLER SUED BY CNO
The title does not suggest the number of legal actions the head of a
polity or corporation is _normally_ involved in, either as a named
party or as a co-respondent or as a moving party. The apparent text is
something unprecidented has occured, which I sincerely doubt.
> Friday, September 1, 1995, the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma filed a
> federal lawsuit against former Principal Chief Wilma Mankiller for
alleged
> misappropriation of funds.
It would be nice to know in which Federal District Court this action
was filed, and under what theory of law, and who the counsel for the
parties are (CO and former Principal Chief). It would also be nice to
know if any similar action had taken place after prior changes of
office.
> The Cherokee Nation Council voted in a special meeting August 31
to
> employ ouside counsel to recover the funds. The sole vote against
this
> measure came from Harold "Jiggs" Phillips, District 2. He declined to
> comment on why he voted "NO." Troy Poteete, District 4 abstained from
voting.
> The Cherokee Nation suit requests:
> -----The courts to require Mankiller to give an accounting under oath
for
> each and every "unlawful expenditure of federal and tribal funds under
the
> control of the Secretary of Interior."
In real law-life, everything of importance is done under penalty of
purjury, so the emphasis of "under oath" imputes strangely a unique
need to preclude untruthfulness specific to the former Principal Chief.
This is, in my reading, the final clue that the writer has a very
sharp and specific ax to grind, the question then becomes, what and
why?
> -----Attorney fees, cost and interest
Normal pleadings boilerplate -- in fact this indicates that little is
actually known to be actionable at this time, which is normal in a case
that has just been filed -- discovery has not yet taken place.
> The lawsuit alleges Mankiller authorized "severance" pay to eleven
tribal
> and Bingo Outpost employees who resigned before Principal Chief Joe
Byrd
> was inaugurated August 14. The payments in question total more than
It would appear that this is potentially a labor-relations case, alt,
some varient on every Conn Law student's tour through the early US
sucession of Presidents case law -- the midnight judges of Madison.
In any case, US$.3M divided by 11 persons is approximately US$30K,
which is not so eggregious as to be "obvious" malfeasence -- this is
only a year's financial cushion upon severance (or less), and even
suggests that a severance package _may_ be vastly less costly to the
employer of record than 11 suits for improper termination if the
process of sucession in the Nation is as nasty as this bit of biased
writing suggests is the norm.
> Nate Young III, who was an outspoken supporter of Wilma's hand
picked
> candidate, George Bearpaw during the recent tribal elections, was
retained
> by the council and filed suit September 1 in the U.S. District Court
in
> Muskogee.
Lawyers work for clients, Mr. Young's political affiliation is not very
evidently germaine, unless again, the writer of this CO piece has some
non-journalistic agenda in mind.
Overall I'm greatly disapointed. Both by the treatment of s.c.n/a.n as
some form of while-true-do-repeat-post-without-meaningful-content dump
and by the simply suspect-if-not-sleazy writing about this outgoing
Principal Chief (a woman, funny how that never got mentioned by the CO
writer). I hope things improve, or that the CO goes away.
Eric Brunner (using MBWillia's account)
>