gaming – Page 11 – Turtle Talk

The Opinion effectively holds that the Tribe’s Gaming Commission lacks authority to revoke a gaming license unless it cites to reasons for its actions that are expressly and affirmatively authorized to do so by codified law. That is incorrect as a matter of law. The Opinion also wrongly asserts that tribal sovereign immunity can be overcome by alleging that a tribal official acted in excess of his or her authority and that, upon such allegation, tribal official immunity is subject to an evidentiary weighing and balancing that involves shifting burdens of production and persuasion, similar to California’s law of qualified immunity. Tribal official immunity, however, is an absolute privilege, like the absolute immunity enjoyed by the Justices of this Court.

We previously covered this case here.

Tenth Circuit Briefs in New Mexico v. Dept. of Interior (Challenge to Part 291 Regs re: Pojoaque Pueblo)

June 18, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here are the briefs:

Interior Opening Brief

Pojoaque Opening Brief

New Mexico Brief

Interior Reply Brief

Pojoaque Reply Brief

Lower court materials here.

Federal Court Dismisses ADEA Claim against Tribal Casino

June 11, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Boricchio v. Chicken Ranch Casino (E.D. Cal.):

13-1 Motion to Dismiss

18 Opposition

20 Reply

24 DCT Order

6th Circuit Opinion in NLRB v. Little River Band of Ottawa Indians

June 9, 2015June 16, 2015Andrew Adams III2 Comments

Docket 12-2 – Opinion – Little River

Docket 12-3 – Judgment – Little River

Update in Cayuga Nation v. Tanner

June 8, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here are more materials in the case captioned Cayuga Nation v. Tanner (N.D. N.Y.):

38 DCT Order Denying Unity Council Motion to Intervene

41 Plaintiffs Reply in Support of PI

42 Plaintiffs Response to Tanner Motion to Dismiss

50 DCT Order Dismissing Claims

52-1 Motion for Reconsideration

60 Tanner Opposition

61 Plaintiffs Reply

Apparently, the Halftown faction (the plaintiffs here) is continuing the fight for gaming, while the Unity Council group has been dismissed from the case. We posted materials on this case here.

GAO Issues Report Expressing Concern over Regulation of Indian Gaming

June 5, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is “Regulation and Oversight by the Federal Government, States, and Tribes.”

Ninth Circuit Sitting En Banc Rules in Favor of Big Lagoon Rancheria in Gaming Dispute with California

June 4, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the opinion in Big Lagoon Rancheria v. State of California:

10-17803

From the court’s syllabus:

The en banc court affirmed the district court’s summary judgment in favor of a tribe that alleged that the State of California had failed to negotiate in good faith for a gaming compact under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act for Class III gaming on a parcel of land taken into trust for the tribe by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Rejecting California’s argument that the tribe lacked standing to compel it to negotiate in good faith under the IGRA, the en banc court held that the State’s argument amounted to an improper collateral attack on the BIA’s decisions to take the parcel of land into trust and to designate the tribe as a federally recognized Indian tribe. The en banc court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in failing to grant a continuance for additional discovery under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(f).

The en banc court dismissed the tribe’s cross-appeal as moot.

Links to oral argument and briefs here.