## Facts

- Dolgencorp, Inc. operated a Dollar General store on land held in trust for the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians and did business under a tribal lease and tribal business license.
- The tribe operated a Youth Opportunity Program (YOP) placing tribal youth in short-term, unpaid educational positions with participating businesses.
- The store’s manager agreed, on behalf of the store, to participate in YOP.
- A 13-year-old tribal member (John Doe) was placed at the store through YOP.
- Doe alleged the manager sexually molested him at the store during the placement.
- Doe sued Dolgencorp and the manager in tribal court, alleging vicarious liability and negligent hiring/training/supervision, and seeking compensatory and punitive damages.
- The tribal trial court denied defendants’ motions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; the Choctaw Supreme Court held tribal-court jurisdiction existed under the Montana framework and remanded.
- Dolgencorp filed a federal action seeking to enjoin the tribal case; the district court granted summary judgment for the tribal defendants, upholding tribal-court jurisdiction.

## Issues

1. Whether a tribal court has civil adjudicatory jurisdiction over tort claims against a nonmember corporation arising on tribal trust land.
2. Whether jurisdiction is authorized by Montana’s first exception for nonmembers who enter consensual relationships with the tribe or its members, and whether the claims are sufficiently connected to that relationship.
3. Whether federal courts must independently police tribal subject-matter jurisdiction sua sponte, or whether challenges to tribal civil authority can be forfeited or waived.
4. Whether exercising tribal-court jurisdiction over Dolgencorp under these facts violates due process.

## Decision

- The Fifth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the tribal defendants.
- The court held the tribal court could exercise civil jurisdiction over Doe’s claims under Montana’s first exception.
- The court held federal courts lack an independent duty to search the record and invalidate tribal jurisdiction absent proper party presentation; limits on tribal civil authority may be treated as waivable in federal court.
- The court rejected Dolgencorp’s due process challenge, finding jurisdiction foreseeable given Dolgencorp’s voluntary and ongoing ties to the tribe.

## Legal Principles

- As a general rule, tribal inherent authority does not extend to nonmembers’ activities, subject to Montana’s exceptions.
- Under Montana’s first exception, tribal authority may reach nonmembers who enter consensual relationships with the tribe or its members (including through leases, licenses, and comparable arrangements) when the claims arise directly from those relationships.
- A sufficient nexus exists where the alleged tort arises from the nonmember’s voluntary participation in tribal-member-related arrangements occurring on tribal trust land (including participation in tribal programs).
- In federal collateral challenges, courts need not raise defects in tribal adjudicatory authority sua sponte; party failures to properly raise such limits can result in waiver/forfeiture.
- Due process is satisfied where a nonmember’s voluntary, ongoing commercial and regulatory relationships with the tribe provide notice that tribal regulation and adjudication may apply.

## Conclusion

The Fifth Circuit held that a tribal court could adjudicate a tribal member’s tort claims against a nonmember corporation arising from alleged misconduct at a reservation store because the corporation’s lease, tribal licensing, and participation in a tribal youth program formed consensual relationships from which the claims directly arose, and the court also treated limits on tribal civil authority as not subject to independent, sua sponte federal policing.


Dolgencorp, Inc. v. Miss. Band of Choctaw Indians, 746 F.3d 167 (5th Cir. 2014)