May 13, 2004
In the Matter of a Mail Dispute Between
DEBORAH S. WILSON
and
R.H. BOINTY
P.S. Docket No. MD 04-19
APPEARANCE FOR DISPUTANT DEBORAH S. WILSON:
Ryland L. Rivas, Esq.
628 West Choctaw Avenue
Chickasha, OK 73018-2436
APPEARANCE FOR DISPUTANT R.H. BOINTY:
R.H. Bointy
P.O. Box 370
Carnegie, OK 73015-0370
POSTAL SERVICE DECISION
Disputant R.H. Bointy has filed an appeal from an Initial Decision in which an Administrative Law Judge concluded that all mail addressed to the Kiowa Tribe of Oklahoma, P.O. Box 369, Carnegie, OK 73015-0369 should be delivered as directed by Disputant Deborah S. Wilson. In reaching this conclusion, the Administrative Law Judge relied on an Order of the Court of Indian Offenses dated February 6, 2004, which directed that the disputed mail should be delivered to Disputant Wilson.[1] Disputant Bointy contends the Court of Indian Offenses lacked jurisdiction to issue the Order relied on by the Administrative Law Judge and that the presiding magistrate was not authorized to act on the Court’s behalf. Additionally, Disputant Bointy argues that there have been violations of the Tribe’s constitution resulting in election irregularities, that the Department of Interior Bureau of Indian Affairs improperly interfered with the Tribe’s election procedures and that the Kiowa Hearing Board is the only entity authorized to decide election disputes under the Tribe’s constitution. As a result, Disputant Bointy asks that Clifford McKenzie, the last regularly elected Chairman of the Tribe’s Business Committee, be permitted to retain control of the mail until a new election is held or, in the alternative, until an appeal filed by Disputant Bointy is decided by the Department of Interior Board of Indian Appeals.
Disputant Bointy has not shown that the Initial Decision is clearly erroneous or that any other grounds exist for the Judicial Officer to grant the appeal. The Administrative Law Judge did make findings regarding the actions of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the provisions of the Tribe’s constitution and the authority of the Tribe’s Hearing Board, but he ultimately concluded that the Order of the Court of Indian Offenses required the Postal Service to deliver the disputed mail in accordance with the direction of Disputant Wilson. While Disputant Bointy contends the Court lacked jurisdiction to consider the Tribe’s election issues and that the presiding magistrate is not qualified to serve on the Court, no persuasive evidence has been presented to establish that the Court lacked jurisdiction to issue the February 6, 2004 Order or that the presiding magistrate was not qualified to serve on, or act, for the Court. In the absence of clear and convincing evidence that the Court lacked jurisdiction to issue the February 6, 2004 Order or that the presiding magistrate lacked authority to serve on, or act, for the Court, the Administrative Law Judge properly relied on the Postal Service regulation providing for delivery of mail in accordance with a court order.[2]
Having concluded that the Administrative Law Judge properly determined that the disputed mail should be delivered in accordance with the direction of Disputant Wilson, there is no reason to permit Clifford McKenzie to control the delivery of the mail until a new election is held. Similarly, since Disputant Bointy has not shown that he is likely to obtain a favorable decision from the Board of Indian Appeals, there is no reason to delay the issuance of a decision in this proceeding while the Board considers his appeal.[3]
Accordingly, the Initial Decision is the final agency decision as provided in 39 C.F.R. §965.12. All mail addressed to the Kiowa Tribe of Oklahoma, P.O. Box 369, Carnegie, OK 73015-0369 is to be delivered as directed by Disputant Wilson. The parties are reminded that this decision determines only the right to delivery of the mail in dispute not the ownership of the mail. If either party receives mail intended for the other, that party is responsible for forwarding such mail to the intended recipient.
James A. Cohen
Judicial Officer
[1] The Court’s Order specifically provides that the Tribe’s mail should be delivered to the named plaintiffs. Disputant Wilson is the lead plaintiff and for purposes of this decision, the representative of all the plaintiffs in this proceeding.
[2] Postal Service regulations provide that “[w]hen the same mail is claimed by different persons, and a court decides to whom delivery should be made, the mail is delivered according to the court order.” Postal Operations Manual, §616.3 (POM Issue 9, July 2002).
[3] See Cyrus Cardan a/k/a Cyrus Azami, P.S. Docket No. POB 98-37 (P.S.D. Aug. 27, 1998).