Court upholds $28 million award in Grand Canyon Skywalk case
FLAGSTAFF, Ariz. (AP) - A federal court on Monday dealt a blow to the business arm of a northern Arizona tribe that owns the Grand Canyon Skywalk by upholding a $28.5 million judgment in favor of a Las Vegas developer who invested the money to build the horseshoe-shaped glass bridge on tribal land.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge David Campbell rejected arguments by the Hualapai Tribe that the award isn't enforceable, at times calling the arguments "nonsensical" and "odd." The American Arbitration Association had determined David Jin is owed the money, mostly for management fees that he was to receive under a 2003 contract with the tribe.
Mark Tratos, an attorney for Jin, said Monday the ruling shows U.S. citizens have recourse in contract disputes with American Indian tribes.
"Their idea is, 'We can do what we want to anyone we want, anytime we want because we're a sovereign,'" Tratos said.
The judgment applies to the Hualapai Tribe's business arm, Sa' Nyu Wa Inc., which had argued the arbitration association lacked jurisdiction and declined to participate in the final arbitration hearing. The tribe said proceeding with arbitration was unnecessary because it had already enforced eminent domain over the contract, taking sole control of the Skywalk.
Campbell said Sa' Nyu Wa could not take away the right of Jin's company to arbitrate its claims, and that the corporation failed to identify what public good would be served by doing so.
A spokesman for the tribe, Dave Cieslak, said Sa' Nyu Wa is reviewing its options.
The Skywalk has been a popular tourist attraction for the Hualapai Tribe, giving some 300,000 visitors a year a view of the Colorado River 4,000 feet below. Jin invested $30 million to build the bridge that lies just west of Grand Canyon National Park, but he and the tribe have disagreed on management fees and an incomplete visitors' center.
The arbitrator found Sa' Nyu Wa and the tribe failed to keep adequate financial records or make those records available for Jin's company to audit. The arbitrator also found the corporation and tribe failed to pay management fees and the Skywalk operation's business expenses, which constituted a breach of contract.
The tribe has said it took over the contract last year because Jin never completed a visitors' center that people must pass through to access the Skywalk and did not finance the utilities. Cieslak said the tribe would pay Jin the fair market value for the Skywalk to "protect the rights of the tribe and end this painful dispute."
Sa' Nyu Wa had asked Campbell to reject the arbitration award by arguing that the tribe's 2003 agreement with Jin didn't allow for financial damages. The corporation also argued tribal members never voted to waive liabilities in excess of $250,000, and said the arbitrator exceeded his powers because only a federal court could order arbitration.
Campbell said the agreement makes no mention of a $250,000 limit and allows arbitration for any controversy, claim or dispute when either party sends such a notice to the other. Campbell found that Sa' Nyu Wa clearly waived it sovereign immunity with respect to financial damages awarded in arbitration that could be enforced in federal court.
"No other reading of the agreement is plausible," the judge said.
Tratos said it's doubtful Jin will receive the $28.5 million in a lump sum but suggested the award could be fulfilled by having the proceeds of ticket sales at the Skywalk directed to Jin by a court order.
Jin also is challenging the jurisdiction of the Hualapai court in a related case that went before a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last year. The Hualapai court in Peach Springs is overseeing the eminent domain case.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge David Campbell rejected arguments by the Hualapai Tribe that the award isn't enforceable, at times calling the arguments "nonsensical" and "odd." The American Arbitration Association had determined David Jin is owed the money, mostly for management fees that he was to receive under a 2003 contract with the tribe.
Mark Tratos, an attorney for Jin, said Monday the ruling shows U.S. citizens have recourse in contract disputes with American Indian tribes.
"Their idea is, 'We can do what we want to anyone we want, anytime we want because we're a sovereign,'" Tratos said.
The judgment applies to the Hualapai Tribe's business arm, Sa' Nyu Wa Inc., which had argued the arbitration association lacked jurisdiction and declined to participate in the final arbitration hearing. The tribe said proceeding with arbitration was unnecessary because it had already enforced eminent domain over the contract, taking sole control of the Skywalk.
Campbell said Sa' Nyu Wa could not take away the right of Jin's company to arbitrate its claims, and that the corporation failed to identify what public good would be served by doing so.
A spokesman for the tribe, Dave Cieslak, said Sa' Nyu Wa is reviewing its options.
The Skywalk has been a popular tourist attraction for the Hualapai Tribe, giving some 300,000 visitors a year a view of the Colorado River 4,000 feet below. Jin invested $30 million to build the bridge that lies just west of Grand Canyon National Park, but he and the tribe have disagreed on management fees and an incomplete visitors' center.
The arbitrator found Sa' Nyu Wa and the tribe failed to keep adequate financial records or make those records available for Jin's company to audit. The arbitrator also found the corporation and tribe failed to pay management fees and the Skywalk operation's business expenses, which constituted a breach of contract.
The tribe has said it took over the contract last year because Jin never completed a visitors' center that people must pass through to access the Skywalk and did not finance the utilities. Cieslak said the tribe would pay Jin the fair market value for the Skywalk to "protect the rights of the tribe and end this painful dispute."
Sa' Nyu Wa had asked Campbell to reject the arbitration award by arguing that the tribe's 2003 agreement with Jin didn't allow for financial damages. The corporation also argued tribal members never voted to waive liabilities in excess of $250,000, and said the arbitrator exceeded his powers because only a federal court could order arbitration.
Campbell said the agreement makes no mention of a $250,000 limit and allows arbitration for any controversy, claim or dispute when either party sends such a notice to the other. Campbell found that Sa' Nyu Wa clearly waived it sovereign immunity with respect to financial damages awarded in arbitration that could be enforced in federal court.
"No other reading of the agreement is plausible," the judge said.
Tratos said it's doubtful Jin will receive the $28.5 million in a lump sum but suggested the award could be fulfilled by having the proceeds of ticket sales at the Skywalk directed to Jin by a court order.
Jin also is challenging the jurisdiction of the Hualapai court in a related case that went before a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last year. The Hualapai court in Peach Springs is overseeing the eminent domain case.
Every dollar made from the date of the ruling should go straight to the settlement
Maybe Jin should stop working with the natives. This is simply one corporation trying to take from another. JIN! Find another partner!
Two saying pop into my head here...
1. Â Revenge is a dish best served cold.
&
2. Paybacks a B*%$h
WOW, how goofy are some of the comments. first they have assimilated why do you think they are acting that way, greed. you see corporations do this kind of thing all the time. Â 2nd not everyone in a tribe gets a check, and the 1/4 or 1/16 blood degree was a cost savings method the US Governement came up with because it was costing to much money. it is all public record. I'm not say one race is better than another, but in America people HAD good values, they help one another, looked out for each other. today "it's all for one, let everyone else fend for them selves" on occassion you see people doing the right thing, but it seems a rare eventÂ
We were just here in Nov. 2012. This explains why it was in the condition it was in. Hualapai Nation did not impress us with the way they ran the facility. They are making tons of money for a substandard attraction with very poor staffing. We were really disapointed in the facilties, not to mention the roads to reach it weren't good enough for horse & buggy. The views were spectacular, but you didn't need to pay to see them. we traveled all over the grand canyon and saw it for free. Don't wast your money to go here! You will need a new car or at least an alignment if you drive on Hualapai land!!!! They need to be held accountable!!!!
Native Americans need to fully assimilate into modern American society. Congress should simply abrogate all tribal sovereignity, and all special tribal rights and immunities. It should establish a procedure for making payment of a reasonable amount in compensation to affected tribal members, after which they should be treated like everyone else.Â
@Matt Modern American society built on the deaths of nations - not a morally ambiguous result to let those remaining nations manage themselves.  Modern American society built on the deaths of slaves - not a morally ambiguous result to remind our children of the horrors of their forefathers.  Modern American society built on the immigration of so many peoples across the globe that the phrase, "Modern American society" is a non sequitur.  Whose society is it anyway?  What is 'American' enough?  No.  The melting pot rules here.Â
@ETSubmariner seriously? As you libs say, "move on!"
If they want to be their "own nation" fine. As long as your 1/16th Tribal you get a check just because right? Let's let them be their own nation and stop allowing them to draw SSI and unemployment. That should help fix our budget. If you want the benefits of living in the US you should have to follow the same rules as the rest of us.
@Putmeincharge You do happen to know where "the rest of us" got all this land, right?
@David Cannon
I bought my land with my blood, sweat and tears, as did my father before me, and his father, and his father and so on!
@ETSubmariner @sometimesright sheeeit...all of Europe is built on blood....Nowhere in the history of the World has a vanquished people been treated as well as American Indians are today. Time to assimilate.
@sometimesright Who took it from the tribes by brute force or coercion.  Land or lives built on blood is still immoral.  You can compensate for your forefathers' butchery or "hands-off approach" to others' butchery by trying to live a good life at least, and leave the tribal nations to manage themselves.
One wonders if dealing with tribes is a wise idea?Â
If these tribes in this day and age want to be sovereign great time to treat their border like we do with Mexico and Canada. Time to tax anything leaving or coming into our country time to ask the people visiting those casino to declare anything the purchased or won when coming back into the US.  And if they become a threat maybe the need to be occupied.Â
Long gone are the days the native Americans were confined to reservations, long gone are the days when they had no rights, and long gone are the days with they had no opportunity to mainstream and even get a higher education or a better job. These are laws that were put into place to protect all Americans. They still get lots of government support in terms of tax dollars. If they sign a contract with a non native contractor then they definately should be made to pay up.
"the tribe failed to keep adequate financial records"Â Oh what a shock /sarcasm
Did Jin get the original 30 million he spent to build this?
Wow, what a view.
The real losers in this will be other tribes in the future.
Â
Unfortunately, some business entrepeneurs will now be hesitant to deal with 'any' tribe, due to the dishonest actions of the Hualapai.
Â
The other way tribes will lose, is demonstrated in a lot of the comments here.  The whole sovereignty issue comes in for debate and criticism, and right or wrong, changes may be made due to this sentiment if it builds.
Â
Breaking our treaties with the Native Americans would be nothing new to them. We've done it over and over.  It was wrong back in the day, and it would be wrong now.
It is long past time to start phasing out these ancient treaties. Tribes like the Hualapai that abuse their sovereign rights should see them modified drastically. Locally, it is long past time for the State of Washington to start inspecting tribal catches and fishing procedures to ensure adherence to state law as well as their "common" share.
@Iconoclast Treaties cannot be 'phased out' unless you meant you intend to do so by force. Â
 @Iconoclast i think you mean federal government. The state has no say over treaties, reservations or indian fishing rights.
 @Iconoclast There is the rub.  natives don't have to adhere to state law.  They are a sovereign nation so set up their own rules.  The only people who can do anything is the B.I.A.
@FBrumfield@Iconoclast
Yeah, they are a foreign nation so the USA canât do anythingâ¦. Â
Mumble mumble, Afghanistan mumble mumble ,Iraq
 @Iconoclast "It is long past time to start phasing out these ancient treaties."
You say that about the sovereignty of the Tribes - and yet scream endlessly about the rights of the "sovereign" States of the US every time the Feds pass a law or regulation requiring the States to do something.
 @OrcasThunder There is a well-established process for changing our federal system of government. When the federal government oversteps it's authority then sensible people will scream about it. Just as when the states overstep their authority sensible people scream about that too.Â
Â
Tribal sovereignty is a different thing altogether. If you wish them to become their own states then propose that. But right now they are merely treaty-defined entities. Those treaties can be changed and should be changed. There is little reason in the 21st century to maintain special rights for a small segment of our population.
@OrcasThunder @Iconoclast ".....raping the land for oil & minerals" That's really no different than how they currently treat their land with garbage, wrecked vehicles, oil barrels etc. piling up all over the place.  Glad to know the money they do receive goes to better their lives, land and families. And not at all am I for mining or drilling but, contamination is contamination-no matter who or what does it. There regardless, should be a penalty for that....not a payment!Â
 And please explain your theory on the sub-minimum wage. Not only is min. wage going up, we in the state of WA have the highest min. wage or the 2nd highest in the country.  And fyi-anyone has the right to say NO to any job offered or 'rights to their property'. Its not anyone's fault they've failed to properly educate themselves and their children (who live on the res) on how to sustain an actual living by working for a living. (they need to blame only themselves for that) Something most Americans already do, support themselves to sustain their OWN lives without sucking off the 'teet' of the government.Â--my 2 cents is all-- Â
 @Iconoclast an american indian has a choice to either live on the reservation or live off the reservation and pay taxes just like the rest of us. We can't change treaties without paying billions of dollars in compensation.
 @OrcasThunder  @Iconoclast The pure and simple fact of the matter is that the tribes demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt that they did not care one iota about their neighbors, many of whom had to leave their homes of long standing.  Why then should we care about them?
 @Cetus  @Iconoclast "Not sure whether the tribes or the "capitalists" are the greater land rapists."
I did not say that the tribes are any less capable of making mistakes and even being stupid. The point is, it is THEIR LAND. As the owners, they have the right to do what they want with it. The outside companies and others do not.
And overdrawing the water supply is a far less serious than the damage the drillers and miners do to the land. Water will eventually replenish, contamination of the land from drilling and mining is virtually impossible to repair to the original condition...just ask the people of the Appalachian mountain areas.
 @OrcasThunder  @Iconoclast Not sure whether the tribes or the "capitalists" are the greater land rapists.  Before I moved up here from San Diego, one of the local tribes petitioned the county to tap directly into a reservoir not on tribal property.  They needed to do that because their casino and golf course had sucked the aquifer dry, leaving them and their non-tribal neighbors without water and having to truck it in for themselves and their animals.  I've gotten a great deal more skeptical about tribal sovereignty and ecological claims since.Â
 @Iconoclast "Yeah, that's a great idea."
Not what I meant - but far better that what you would like, total destruction of the Reservations, leaving the people with NO protections against the capitalists wanting to rape the land for oil & minerals, and exploit the people for menial labor at sub-minimum wages with no benefits...
 @OrcasThunder A state for single ethnicity/race? Yeah, that's a great idea. Tribal members can join existing states--multi ethnic states.Â
 @Iconoclast "If you wish them to become their own states then propose that"
Many of them wanted to have that status - but the American government and people have not allowed them that right. Hell, they were hardly allowed to live as people.
The treaties were convenient ways to keep the natives out of sight and out of mind - now that the tribes have started using the White Man's methods of getting ahead, you want to negate the treaties and disband the tribes...
The curse of Manifest Destiny lives on in the minds of those who agree with General Phil Sheridan.
 @Iconoclast I couldn't agree more. Tired of them getting to do what ever they want. It is sad and wrong what happened in the past but I didn't do it. Why do I need to pay for it? Indians want equal rights but special privileges. Our state is broke. Tax them like everybody else gets taxed.
Greed. Sovereign Greed.
 @B747-8i Greed is a plague upon our earth.........
it's time to end the treaty rights of the Indians, that was then ans this is now! Do the Indians really think the British would have been so nice to them had the British won the American Revolutionary War???  No! It's time they paid their fair share of taxes and get treated like everyone else in this Country.  They also shouldn't be able to take more that the legal possession limits when it comes to hunting and fishing also. Were all suppose to be "Equal" in this country and I don't see how we are if they allow special "Sovereignty rights".Â
 @Seahawker A deal is a deal, a treaty doesn't expire. If you would take the time to read a little you will find that the US consistently broke treaties with the natives. They were granted sovereignty rights in exchange for peace after being invaded and murdered. There's nothing "special" about it. In this case a deal is a deal also and the court has ruled correctly.
 @uscit16791949  @Seahawker I assume your indian uscit. You might want to go back and review your American History before you make such idiotic comments.
Â
Treaties do expire. It is time for the US to stop honoring tribes. They don't deserve it.
@ETSubmariner @seattleemt @uscit16791949 @Seahawker it's a fact of history that there are waves of conquerors, from the Mongols, to the Normans, to the US taking over the Hawaiian Kingdom--which I don't see anyone complaining about here. Those who don't know their history are doomed to revise it.
@seattleemt @uscit16791949 @Seahawker Treaties expire when they were agreed to expire, but not all treaties have an expiration date.  Time for the US to remember it's forefathers butchered these people, and to maintain real human relations instead of ignoring their own history.  Ignorance of history isn't a potential to repeat it - it is a fact of history to repeat it, usually the one side being the one who gets butchered in turn.
 @uscit16791949  @Seahawker Of course treaties expire when one side or the other decide to end them. That is why it is called sovereignty.
Now if Washington would only stand up to the tribes....
 @Common Sense You could turn that around and the tribes would be in the right, what then? Do you propose repeating what was done in the 1800's?
the view on the way up and down, and the scenery at the bottom is worth the descent and climb back up. and one's feet are solidly planted on the ground.  for those reading, if time allows during your visit i would recommend the journey.
 @jennieb My wife and I had a planned helicopter trip out there from Vegas last year but it got cancelled the morning we were supposed to leave.
 @jennieb For many it's a once in a lifetime thing. One reachable if you plan properly. For me, it's been worth every bit to go see places like these in our own Nation, and if you're going to go out of the way to go see The Canyon, you may as well do it right and REALLY go see it, going down into the Canyon.Â
Wow! There is no way I could go on that bridge! Just standing on the regular edge of the canyon makes me nervous!
 @justathought The time I went for the first two days I was standing about 6 feet back from the edge even though there was a railing. Took a while for me to get over the fear of the "visual cliff". We were there about 5 days and eventually I became quite comfortable looking into the abyss.
 @justathought Yea I'm not sure I could do it either, at least not without some depends on lol.