Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
In the Matter of the Guardianship of K.D.B.
Date: 02-11-2025
Case Number:
Judge: Stephen R. Pazzo
Court: District Court, Rogers County, Oklahoma
Plaintiff's Attorney:
Click Here For The Best Claremore Family Law Lawyer Directory
Defendant's Attorney: |
Click Here For The Best Claremore Family Law Lawyer Directory
Description:
Claremore, Oklahoma, family law lawyers represented the parties in a private guardianship over two Indian children.
This matter first originated on June 6, 2013, when Tracy L. Clark and Edward A. Clark, Petitioners/Appellants/Guardians, filed a petition for the appointment of guardians of minor children in Rogers County District Court. The minor children were both enrolled members of the Cherokee Nation. The district court entered a temporary order appointing Petitioners as Guardians the same day.
On June 20, 2013, Cherokee Nation intervened in the case. Nation noted that the minor children are both "Indian child[ren]" within the meaning of 25 U.S.C. § 1903(4)1 of ICWA; Indian children's tribe has the absolute right to intervene at any point in a state court proceeding for foster care placement of an Indian child pursuant to 25 U.S.C. § 1911(c)2; Nation's intent at the time was to be involved with ICWA compliance and make recommendations; and Nation reserved the right to transfer the proceedings to tribal court. On October 25, 2013, the district court issued letters of guardianship to Petitioners. On April 11, 2014, the district court filed its order appointing the Petitioners as Guardians.
Because the children reside on land in Claremore that is within the Cherokee Nation's historical reservation boundaries as understood after McGirt, see Majority Op. ¶ 17, the tribal court had exclusive jurisdiction under § 1911(a) of ICWA but for the Agreement, see id. ¶ 20. Under the Agreement, the State's district court had concurrent jurisdiction pursuant to Section (IV) of the Agreement until the Cherokee Nation asked for a transfer of this guardianship proceeding to tribal court pursuant to Section (V)(2) of the Agreement. Id. ¶ 23. At that point, the "shall transfer" language of Section (V)(2) required the state court to transfer the matter to the tribal court. Moreover, Section (V)(2) provides that "[t]he good cause provisions of 25 U.S.C. § 1911(b) and the accompanying regulations shall not operate to deny transfer to tribal court as the tribal court would have otherwise had exclusive jurisdiction" under § 1911(a) of ICWA. Intergovernmental Agreement, supra, § (V)(2), at 4; see also Majority Op. ¶ 27. Thus, there was no basis for the state court to refuse transfer to the tribal court.
This matter first originated on June 6, 2013, when Tracy L. Clark and Edward A. Clark, Petitioners/Appellants/Guardians, filed a petition for the appointment of guardians of minor children in Rogers County District Court. The minor children were both enrolled members of the Cherokee Nation. The district court entered a temporary order appointing Petitioners as Guardians the same day.
On June 20, 2013, Cherokee Nation intervened in the case. Nation noted that the minor children are both "Indian child[ren]" within the meaning of 25 U.S.C. § 1903(4)1 of ICWA; Indian children's tribe has the absolute right to intervene at any point in a state court proceeding for foster care placement of an Indian child pursuant to 25 U.S.C. § 1911(c)2; Nation's intent at the time was to be involved with ICWA compliance and make recommendations; and Nation reserved the right to transfer the proceedings to tribal court. On October 25, 2013, the district court issued letters of guardianship to Petitioners. On April 11, 2014, the district court filed its order appointing the Petitioners as Guardians.
Because the children reside on land in Claremore that is within the Cherokee Nation's historical reservation boundaries as understood after McGirt, see Majority Op. ¶ 17, the tribal court had exclusive jurisdiction under § 1911(a) of ICWA but for the Agreement, see id. ¶ 20. Under the Agreement, the State's district court had concurrent jurisdiction pursuant to Section (IV) of the Agreement until the Cherokee Nation asked for a transfer of this guardianship proceeding to tribal court pursuant to Section (V)(2) of the Agreement. Id. ¶ 23. At that point, the "shall transfer" language of Section (V)(2) required the state court to transfer the matter to the tribal court. Moreover, Section (V)(2) provides that "[t]he good cause provisions of 25 U.S.C. § 1911(b) and the accompanying regulations shall not operate to deny transfer to tribal court as the tribal court would have otherwise had exclusive jurisdiction" under § 1911(a) of ICWA. Intergovernmental Agreement, supra, § (V)(2), at 4; see also Majority Op. ¶ 27. Thus, there was no basis for the state court to refuse transfer to the tribal court.
Outcome:
Affirmed
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
About This Case
What was the outcome of In the Matter of the Guardianship of K.D.B.?
The outcome was: Affirmed
Which court heard In the Matter of the Guardianship of K.D.B.?
This case was heard in District Court, Rogers County, Oklahoma, OK. The presiding judge was Stephen R. Pazzo.
Who were the attorneys in In the Matter of the Guardianship of K.D.B.?
Plaintiff's attorney: Click Here For The Best Claremore Family Law Lawyer Directory. Defendant's attorney: | Click Here For The Best Claremore Family Law Lawyer Directory.
When was In the Matter of the Guardianship of K.D.B. decided?
This case was decided on February 11, 2025.