claiming the torts of intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligent
is not included in the record.
4 Garcia, in a declaration submitted during the course of litigation,
represents that he alone approached the residence but that he noticed a
Nooksack Patrol Officer in the area when leaving. Because of the posture of the
motion to dismiss, we disregard this minor dispute of fact.
3
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
No. 83456-8-I/4
infliction of emotional distress. Judge Dodge, Ashby and Gilliland, Garcia, and
various John Does were named as defendants. The case was stayed pending
the resolution of the federal case, Rabang v. Kelly, another attempt by the
Rabangs to challenge their disenrollment and attempted eviction. On appeal
from the district court’s dismissal, the Ninth Circuit affirmed, holding that it was up
to the Nooksack Tribe to resolve the claims because addressing the underlying
evictions would require intervening in tribal member disputes. Rabang v. Kelly,
328 F. Supp. 3d 1164, 1168 (9th Cir. 2018).
After the federal court ruling in June 2021, the tribal defendants in this
case moved to dismiss and the trial court dismissed the case without prejudice.
It held that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the Rabangs’ tort
claims stemmed “directly from the Nooksack Tribal Court’s issuance of an
eviction order and the Tribal Police’s execution of the same.”
The Rabangs moved for reconsideration, contending that the court’s
reasoning rests on errors of law and fails to achieve substantial justice. The trial
court denied the motion, holding that the court lacked jurisdiction over the