Here are the materials in Lacy v. Snohomish County (Wash. Super. Ct.):
28 05-30-17 Second Amended Complaint
67 6-22-18 Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment
72 7-9-18 Plaintiff’s Response in Opposition to Defendant’s Summary Judgment Motion
74 7-16-18 Defendant’s Reply in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment
78 7-24-18 Order on Summary Judgment
95 8-9-18 Plaintiff’s Response to Motion for Reconsideration
96 8-14-18 Order Denying Motion for Reconsideration
98 8- 25-18 Motion to Stay Trial Date and Certify for Discretionary Review
104 8-31-18 Plaintiff’s Response to Motion to Stay Trial Date and Certify for Discretionary Review
105 9-5-18 Defendant’s Reply on Motion to Stay Trial Date and Certify for Discretionary Review
110 9-5-18 Order Denying Motion to Stay Trial Date and Certify for Discretionary Review
Turtle Talk 
Were the Tribal Officers operating under a “638” Contract or Compact or Master Funding Agreement and did they require Insurance Coverage with a waiver of Sovereign immunity up to the amount of coverage? Or, if no insurance required, there may be a Federal Tort Claim asserted for the actions of the officers serving under the Tribe as a Contractor of BIA Law Enforcement Services. The Feds would be ultimately liable…. barring any Statute of Limitations issue or any “indemnification” language protecting the Feds from the actions of their Contractor. Just a thought.