Capener v. Tanadgusix Corp.

ERA VII — Corporate Maturation & Expansion
Court Case
1994

Congress included in ANCSA a number of provisions designed to protect the rights of those who have valid existing rights to land subject to conveyance under the Act. Thus conveyances to Native corporations must be made subject to the provisions of existing leases, contracts and permits. ANCSA § 14(g), 43 U.S.C. § 1613(g). Those who have made prior lawful entries for the purpose of gaining title to a homestead, a headquarters site, a trade and manufacturing site, or a small tract site are protected and entitled to a patent when they meet the requirements of the law under which they enter. ANCSA § 22(b), 43 U.S.C. § 1621(b). Similarly, those who have prior valid mining claims and locations are protected. ANCSA § 22(c), 43 U.S.C. § 1621 (c). In addition, there are provisions which require conveyances to individuals or organizations on the basis of their occupancy for a particular purpose rather than the presence of a valid existing right or a lawful entry under the public land laws. This case involves the interpretation of two such provisions, sections 14(c)(1) and (2).[1] See 43 U.S.C. § 1613(c)(1) & (2).

What Happened

1. The petition for rehearing is GRANTED in part. Changes are made on pages 15 and 34.

2. Opinion No. 4134, published on October 7, 1994, is WITHDRAWN.

Entered by direction of the Court at Anchorage, Alaska on November 4, 1994.

Why It Matters Today

Adds precedent that influences how ANCSA corporations, regulators, and shareholders interpret governance rights and remedies.

Related Patterns

Pattern 7: Cultural Expectations vs. Corporate Law

Related Governance Themes

No items found.

Sources

Primary Source
Secondary Source Link