OKMULGEE – As previously reported, the Muscogee Creek Nation Citizenship Board filed a petition for rehearing in the Grayson/Kennedy case at the MCN Supreme Court on August 4. Grayson/Kennedy’s legal representation filed their opposition to the rehearing petition on August 11.
The filing details the appellate rules for the MCNSC, specifically Rule 24 which states the grounds for filing a petition for rehearing. According to the opposition filing:
Appellant’s Petition for Rehearing is doomed because it does not rest on either of the two exclusive grounds for rehearing identified by Rule 24 alone. MCN RAP 24 (establishing two limited reasons for rehearing, “(1) [t]hat “facts[] material to the decision” or “some question decisive of the case submitted by counsel” were “overlooked,” or (2) “that the decision is in conflict with an express statute or controlling decision to which the attention of the Court was not directed”) (emphasis added). Tellingly, Appellant never even references Rule 24. Instead Appellant states that this Court must grant rehearing “so this Court can cure its legal errors.” Pet. for Reh’g at 1. That is not one of the two grounds for rehearing this Court authorized in Rule 24. Appellant’s Petition should be denied for the simple reason that it is procedurally infirm and fails to follow this Court’s clear statement in Rule 24 that only those two grounds “and no others”- can support rehearing. Appellant’s Petition for Rehearing should also be denied because it does not comply with the substance of Rule 24. Nowhere in the Petition for Rehearing is there any reference to a dispositive fact or question raised in the briefs that this Court overlooked, nor is there any reference to a dispositive statute or controlling decision to which this Court was not previously directed.
Mvskoke Media will have ongoing coverage of this developing story.
