United States v. Hatahley: A Legal Archaeology Case Study in Law and Racial Conflict

101 Pages Posted: 6 Jan 2010

See all articles by Debora Threedy

Debora Threedy

University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law

Date Written: 2008

Abstract

In this case study, the author examines the ways in which race affects the progress and outcome of litigation under the Federal Tort Claims Act. The litigation is brought by individual Navajo plaintiffs against the federal government for the destruction of over a hundred horses and burros. The background conflict over access to public land is laid out, and then the article looks at the difficulty in assessing damages, the impact of the litigation on the underlying land claims, and the question of judicial bias.

Keywords: Federal Tort Claims Act, civil procedure, remedies, damages, mandamus, Bureau of Land Management, public lands, grazing, Taylor Grazing Act, Native American rights, racial prejudice, Navajo, Native American land claims, idiosyncratic value, judicial impartiality, judicial bias

JEL Classification: A13, J70, J71, K10, K11, K13, K19, K32, K41, N51, N52, Q15, Q24, Q28

Suggested Citation

Threedy, Debora, United States v. Hatahley: A Legal Archaeology Case Study in Law and Racial Conflict (2008). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1532334 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1532334

Debora Threedy (Contact Author)

University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law ( email )

383 S. University Street
Salt Lake City, UT 84112-0730
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
99
Abstract Views
1,103
rank
335,322
PlumX Metrics