Rob Roy Smith is the Managing Partner for the firm's Seattle office. Mr. Smith exclusively practices federal Indian law. He advises Indian tribal clients on all aspects of federal, state and tribal law, including tribal sovereignty, economic development, natural and cultural resource protection, taxation, and gaming.
Mr. Smith is dedicated to helping Indian tribal governments achieve their goals. Whether as general counsel or special litigation counsel, Mr. Smith consistently finds the best legal and business solutions to benefit tribal communities.
Mr. Smith has successfully represented Indian tribal governments, individual Indians and tribal businesses in high-stakes litigation before tribal, state and federal courts, including numerous appellate courts, and the Washington and Idaho Supreme Courts, on issues ranging from protecting tribal sovereign immunity to securing treaty rights. He has filed briefs before the United States Supreme Court and the United States Court of Federal Claims on a variety of issues, including tribal jurisdiction, the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) and fiduciary duty. Mr. Smith also has extensive experience litigating tribal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) cases to protect Tribal decision makers and in obtaining valuable taxable and tax-free financing for tribal economic development.
Mr. Smith was listed by The Best Lawyers in America® for Native American Law in 2019 and the five years immediately preceding. He was recognized as a Washington “Super Lawyer” for Native American Law in 2017 and the three years immediately preceding by Super Lawyers magazine. Mr. Smith was named a 2016 “Rising Star” by Law360 for Native American Law. Mr. Smith was listed in the 2019 and the three years immediately preceding editions of Chambers USA: America’s Leading Lawyers for Business for Native American Law and he was also ranked Nationally as “Up and Coming” for Native American Law in 2016 and 2017 by Chambers USA: America’s Leading Lawyers for Business. Mr. Smith is a recipient of the firm’s Pro Bono Collaboration Award in 2017 for his work on a federal civil rights litigation case for a Native Hawaiian father and his two young sons against the boys’ elementary schools, their principal, and superintendent.
Representation of a federally-recognized tribal government and gaming authority in the successful negotiation and closing of new secured credit facilities provided by a syndicate of bank lenders consisting of more than $300 million in aggregate principal amount of revolving loan (including letter of credit and swing line loan subfacilities) and term loan credit facilities (including an option to reallocate a portion of term loans to tax exempt loans), together with an additional $50 million in optional incremental facilities, secured by assets of the gaming authority, for use in refinancing existing gaming and resort related indebtedness of the tribe and anticipated future casino and resort expansion projects. The transaction was completed in 2014 and received the Native American Finance Officers Association (NAFOA) 2015 “Deal of the Year” Award.
Represent an Indian tribe in California in $28 million tax preemption litigation against County of Riverside.
Represent Indian tribes, tribal officials and tribal judges in federal RICO actions and related tort litigation challenging tribal decision making.
Represent Indian tribes with all aspects of federal, state and tribal taxation, including defending Indian tribes and Indian casinos against IRS examinations, and assisting tribes with the development of taxation codes and general welfare policies.
Represent Indian tribe in Washington State in ongoing treaty fishing rights litigation (U.S. v. Washington).
Represent Indian tribe in Washington State in $50 million contract dispute with the State of Washington.
Represent the Quinault Indian Nation against four school districts and their superintendents and athletic directors, alleging racial discrimination in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Washington State law.
Insights View All
Northwestern School of Law of Lewis and Clark College, J.D.
Certificate in Natural Resources and Environment Law, cum laude
Animal Law Review, Editor in Chief (1999-2000)
College of the Holy Cross, B.A. (1997)
U.S. Supreme Court
U.S. Court of Federal Claims
U.S. Tax Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington
U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon
U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho
Various Tribal Courts
Executive Council, Seattle University School of Law's Center for Indian Law and Policy (March 2016-Present)
Adjunct Professor, Federal Indian Law, Seattle University School of Law (2008-Present)
Visiting Professor, The University of Montana School of Law, Taxation and Finance in Indian Country (August 2017)
Washington State BarBri, Federal Indian Law, Instructor (2009-2012)
Animal Legal Defense Fund, Volunteer Attorney (2007-Present)
Idaho State Bar, Indian Law Section, Co-Founder and Past Chair
Washington State Bar, Indian Law Section, Member
Oregon State Bar, Indian Law Section, Member
Lewis and Clark Law School, Alumni Board of Directors, Member (2007-2012)
Marathon Maniac, Member
While we are pleased to have you contact us by telephone, surface mail, electronic mail, or by facsimile transmission, contacting Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP or any of its attorneys does not create an attorney-client relationship. The formation of an attorney-client relationship requires consideration of multiple factors, including possible conflicts of interest. An attorney-client relationship is formed only when both you and the Firm have agreed to proceed with a defined engagement.
DO NOT CONVEY TO US ANY INFORMATION YOU REGARD AS CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL A FORMAL CLIENT-ATTORNEY RELATIONSHIP HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
If you do convey information, you recognize that we may review and disclose the information, and you agree that even if you regard the information as highly confidential and even if it is transmitted in a good faith effort to retain us, such a review does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could be used against you.