Free Response - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:99-cv-00550-ECH

Document 282

Filed 11/09/2007

Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

THE OSAGE NATION AND/OR TRIBE OF INDIANS OF OKLAHOMA, Plaintiff, v.

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case No. 99-cv-0550-ECH

PROPOSED INTERVENORS RESPONSE TO OSAGE NATION'S NOVEMBER 7, 2007 SCHEDULING SUBMISSION The undersigned Proposed Intervenors file the following response to the scheduling suggestion of the Osage Nation. 1. If the "promised" Motion to Disqualify is filed, only then could the parties and the Court determine what response and hearing schedule might be appropriate. This is especially true in light of the type of "fact intensive" allegation which the Plaintiff alludes to. An evidentiary hearing may be necessary to prove the allegation false. 2. A Motion to Disqualify is often used as a tool for harassment and should be viewed with extreme caution. Tannahill v. The United States, 25 Cl. Ct. 149 at 164. This is especially true when the real parties in interest are those owners of Osage Headrights, i.e. the Proposed Intervenors.1

1

See Osage Allotment Act of June 28, 1906, 34 Stat. 539, as amended.

Case 1:99-cv-00550-ECH

Document 282

Filed 11/09/2007

Page 2 of 2

Wherefore, in consideration of these premises the Proposed Intervenors request that the briefing schedule and decision on their Motion to Intervene not be suspended. Respectfully submitted, S/Bradley D. Brickell BRADLEY D. BRICKELL, OBA#117 BRICKELL & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 400 Hightower Building 105 North Hudson Oklahoma City, OK 73102 Telephone 405-236-0008 Facsimile 405-236-0013 ATTORNEYS FOR PROPOSED PLAINTIFFS CHRIS HADLOCK, JODELL HEATH, LINDA HESKETT, CORA JEAN JECK, ANNA KAY PRICE, DIANE SIMPKINS, GEORGE TALLCHIEF, AND JULIE WILSON