Brendale v. Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakima Indian Nation

492 U.S. 408 (1989)

From our private database of 45,900+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Brendale v. Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakima Indian Nation

United States Supreme Court
492 U.S. 408 (1989)

Facts

The reservation lands of the Yakima Indian Nation (the tribe) (plaintiff) were divided into two areas: one closed to the general public and another open to the general public. Both areas contained property held in fee by nonmembers of the tribe, though ownership of land by nonmembers and non-Indians was significantly higher in the open area. The tribe and the county in which the lands were situated enacted conflicting zoning ordinances. Philip Brendale (defendant), who was part Indian but not a member of the tribe, owned a 160-acre tract in the closed area. Brendale sought to develop summer cabins on his property, which would have been permitted by the county zoning designation but not by the tribal zoning designation. Stanley Wilkinson (defendant), a non-Indian, owned a 40-acre tract in the open area. Wilkinson sought to subdivide his property into smaller lots, which would have been permitted by the county zoning designation but not by the tribal zoning designation. The planning department approved both developments. The tribe brought suit to subject the Brendale and Wilkinson properties to the authority of the tribal zoning ordinance. The tribe argued that this authority derived from both the original treaty that established the reservation and the tribe’s inherent sovereignty. The federal district court upheld the tribe’s authority over Brendale’s property but not over Wilkinson’s property. The federal court of appeals affirmed with respect to Brendale but reversed with respect to Wilkinson and remanded for a new balancing of tribal and county interests. Brendale, Wilkinson, and Yakima County petitioned the United States Supreme Court for certiorari, which was granted.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning ()

Concurrence (White, J.)

Concurrence (Stevens, J.)

Concurrence/Dissent (Blackmun, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 736,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 736,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,900 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 736,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 45,900 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership