Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Cotton Petroleum Corporation v. New Mexico

United States Supreme Court
490 U.S. 163 (1989)


Facts

The Jicarilla Apache Tribe in New Mexico operated numerous on-reservation oil and gas leases under the Indian Mineral Leasing Act of 1938 (IMLA), 25 U.S.C. § 396. Cotton Petroleum Corporation (Cotton) (plaintiff) was a non-Indian company that produced oil and gas under a lease with the Apache Tribe. Beginning in 1972, the Apache Tribe assessed an 8 percent tax on the oil and gas extracted by Cotton. This tax was contested but upheld by the United States Supreme Court. The State of New Mexico (defendant) also levied a state tax on oil and gas production extracted on the reservation. Cotton challenged New Mexico’s tax in state court. Cotton argued that New Mexico should not be allowed to tax oil and gas production on an Indian reservation because New Mexico did not expend significant resources to support such production. The Apache Tribe intervened, arguing that imposition of state taxes interfered with tribal taxes on oil and gas and decreased Apache Tribe revenues by discouraging companies from working on the reservation. The New Mexico state courts upheld the state tax. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Stevens, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Dissent (Blackmun, J.)

The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

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 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read 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. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 218,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.