## Facts

- A group identifying as the Mashpee Tribe sued the Town of Mashpee and various landowners and officials seeking recovery of land in Mashpee, Massachusetts.
- The claim was brought under the Indian Nonintercourse Act, 25 U.S.C. § 177, alleging that large tracts of tribal land had been alienated without the federal approval required by the statute.
- Mashpee originated as an “Indian plantation,” with land historically held in common; Massachusetts later altered local governance and land tenure through statutes, including creation of the District of Mashpee (1834) and authorization of partition of common lands among individual proprietors (1842).
- In 1869, Massachusetts removed restraints on alienation of land held by Indians and ended state guardianship, after which many parcels were sold over time to non-Indians.
- Defendants contested that the plaintiff group was an “Indian tribe” within the meaning of § 177 at legally significant times, including when suit was filed.
- The court severed the threshold question of “tribal existence” for a separate jury trial and reserved questions of tribal title and the validity of land transfers for later.
- After a lengthy trial, the jury answered special interrogatories addressing whether the Mashpee proprietors (and their families) constituted an Indian tribe on specified historical dates, ultimately finding no tribal status at the time the lawsuit was commenced.

## Issues

1. Whether the plaintiff group constituted an “Indian tribe” within the meaning of the Indian Nonintercourse Act at the time the action was filed, so as to have standing to sue under 25 U.S.C. § 177.
2. Whether “tribal existence” for purposes of § 177 is a factual issue that may be tried to a jury using special interrogatories.
3. Whether, absent tribal status at filing, the court may reach reserved questions concerning tribal title and the validity of historical land conveyances.

## Decision

- The court entered judgment for defendants and dismissed the action.
- The court accepted the jury’s special findings that the plaintiff group did not constitute an Indian tribe for purposes of § 177 at the time suit was filed.
- Because tribal status was a necessary predicate to invoke the Act, the court held the plaintiffs lacked standing.
- The court did not proceed to decide the reserved issues of tribal title or the legality of specific land transfers under the Act.

## Legal Principles

- The Indian Nonintercourse Act applies to conveyances of land of an “Indian nation or tribe” and requires federal authorization; a plaintiff must qualify as a covered tribe to invoke the Act’s protections and remedies.
- Tribal status under § 177 may be treated as a threshold, case-dispositive predicate that must be resolved before addressing title or conveyance validity.
- Tribal existence for § 177 purposes may be submitted to a jury as a question of fact and resolved through special interrogatories addressing status at selected dates.
- Standing under § 177 turns centrally on whether the plaintiff group was a tribe at the time the action was commenced.

## Conclusion

The court dismissed the Nonintercourse Act land claim because a jury found the plaintiff group was not an Indian tribe under § 177 when the lawsuit was filed, eliminating statutory standing and making further litigation over title and past conveyances unnecessary.


Mashpee Tribe v. Town of Mashpee, 447 F. Supp. 940 (D. Mass. 1978)