The Lummi Nation v. Golder Associates, Inc., et al.
United States District Court for the Western District of Washington
236 F. Supp. 2d 1183 (2002)

- Written by Kelli Lanski, JD
Facts
The Lummi Nation (Lummi) (plaintiffs), a Native American tribe, sued archaeology firm Golder Associates (Golder) and its archaeologist Gordon Tucker (collectively, defendants) after the parties got into a dispute about how tribal human remains were handled during the excavation and building of a wastewater-treatment plant. The City of Blaine, Washington, hired Golder to assess cultural resources at the site of its wastewater-treatment plant prior to beginning a construction project. As required by the state historic-preservation officer, Golder proposed a treatment plan for the site, considering the Lummi’s position, which was that the construction plans needed to be flexible enough to accommodate changes if archaeological deposits were found in dig areas, and that the primary goal for the tribe was to protect intact and fragmentary human remains found at the site. Human remains were found after construction began. Rather than calling a Lummi representative to oversee the excavation, Tucker packed up the remains himself and drove them in his truck to Golder’s office. The Lummi sued, arguing that Golder and Tucker breached their agreement and violated the Indian Graves and Records Act by failing to notify the Lummi about the identification of human remains and by removing them from the site without Lummi permission and supervision. The Lummi filed a motion for summary judgment.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lasnik, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 834,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.