Some links are downloadable in PDF format. You will need to have Adobe Acrobar reader installed on your computer before you can download and print these Pages. Click on the Get Acrobat Reader icon below and download the reader for FREE.
Adobe Acrobat

Counsel of Record

Report's 1 thru 5

From the Desk of Dennis G. Chappabitty

Counsel of Record Report #1
February 28, 2003

IT HAS BEEN 20 DAY'S since our meeting in Salt Lake City. During the time between then and now, I have given considerable thought on what we accomplished by holding this extremely important meeting. The meeting was a resounding success! The local press and a TV station were present and we got a write up in the Salt Lake City Tribune on Sunday, Feb. 9.  more >>

Counsel of Record Report #2
May 28, 2003

IN MY LAST REPORT, the defendants named in our lawsuit, Felter, et al., v. Norton, et al., filed their motion to dismiss. The defendant's motion to dismiss argues that the Felter complaint does not establish: (1) subject matter jurisdiction in the United States District Court; (2) the complaint does not identify where the United States government has waived its sovereign immunity; (3) the complaint is completely barred by the statute of limitations; and all the claims in the complaint are barred by the principles of res judicata and collateral estoppel.   more >>

Counsel of Record Report #3
June 20, 2003

ON JUNE 11 AND 12, 2003, I worked intensively with Calvin Hackford and Oranna Felter in Roosevelt, Utah to discuss the defendant's motion to dismiss and to develop a legal strategy in opposition of their motion. In my last Report, I briefly described the basis for the defendant's motion to dismiss. I urge all of you who have access to the internet to thoroughly review the motion to dismiss prior to the June 28 plaintiff's meeting in Heber City, Utah.  more >>

Counsel of Record Report # 4
October 24, 2003

MY FIRST CONCERN AT THIS POINT RIGHT AFTER the filing of the Plaintiffs’ Opposition to the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss in Felter, et al. v. Norton, et al.,is not the litigation itself but the efforts by the Affiliated Ute Citizens to undermine YOUR case against the Federal Government. I have reviewed various documents given out by the AUC promising enrollment in the Ute Tribe. It is my conclusion that there is no factual basis for this “promise” since the Ute Tribe has firmly stated its position, in the form of a tribal resolution, against the so-called terminated “mixedblood” Utes and that position has not changed. From all angles, the AUC is engaging in a plot to entice the Felter plaintiffs to pull out of the case and go over to the AUC side.  more >>

Counsel of Record Report # 5
December 14, 2003

BEFORE I TALK ABOUT THE CURRENT STATUS OF FELTER, et al., V. NORTON, et al., I must reflect back at the enduring Spirit of our Tribal Elders who are no longer with us. The history of the federal government’s policy of stealing our land, destroying our tribal cultures, forcibly taking our youth far away to teach them non-tribal values, and then trying to squeeze our tribal identities out of us is a significant part of our every day lives as indigenous people. According to the defendants’ view in Felter, this proven history of injustices committed long ago has no legal value in the federal court system.  more >>

Reports 1-5 / 6-10.. /  11-15.. / 16-20  / 21-23..