Off-Reservation Trust Acquisition for Gaming Purposes — Butte County v. Hogen

The case is in the D.C. District Court and involves the Mechoopda Indian Tribe of Chico Rancheria. The district court holds that GTB v. U.S. Att’y is the “leading case” in the area! An excerpt:

The court agrees with Defendants that the County relies on too restrictive an interpretation of the IGRA in support of its contention that the Chico Parcel cannot qualify as a “restoration of lands.” The County contends that the term “restoration of lands” should be interpreted as including only a restored tribe’s former rancheria. But the IGRA does not define “restoration of lands”; therefore, courts have held it to be ambiguous and interpreted it broadly. See, e.g., City of Roseville v. Norton, 348 F.3d at 1020, 1026-27 (D.C.Cir.2003). If a broad interpretation is permissible, it certainly is in order here considering that the Tribe’s former rancheria, the Chico Rancheria, is no longer available for restoration because the City of Chico and the University have subsumed it. Accordingly, the Tribe sought to acquire lands as near as possible to its former Rancheria and, according to the OGC and agencies, within its original ancestral homeland, the Chico Parcel. Applying the Grand Traverse II factors and City of Roseville in light of the administrative record, the agency decisions must stand because they considered the relevant factors and articulated a rational connection between the administrative record and their conclusions. See Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp., 518 F.3d at 919.

The materials:

butte-county-dct-opinion

Continue reading

News Coverage of Gun Lake Casino Plans

From the K’zoo Gazette:

Plans for the Gun Lake Casino are quietly edging forward, despite what appears to be an impending bankruptcy filing by Station Casinos Inc., the company hired to manage its construction and operation.

The Gun Lake Band of Pottawatomi is on track to release a schedule for groundbreaking, construction and hiring sometime this spring, according to those familiar with the situation.

The tribe declined to comment this week when asked about the status of the $200 million project, but it has said Las Vegas-based Station Casinos’ problems are not hindering the project.

Continue reading

Bankruptcy Judge Tours Greektown

From the Detroit News (via Pechanga):

Could the big empty shell of a room tucked away in a corner of Greektown Casino-Hotel’s downtown complex serve as a viable event center?

That’s the question facing bankruptcy judge Walter Shapero this afternoon as he tours what Greektown lawyers call an event center and what attorneys for the City of Detroit are calling a breach of contract.

Greektown is arguing for a tax rollback from the city and state that would save it millions a year in taxes levied on gaming revenues. That rollback is dependent on compliance with a revised development agreement approved by Detroit City Council in 2006.

Greektown wants Judge Shapero to rule that the casino has complied with the agreement, opening the door to lower taxes and giving the casino the ability to transfer the agreement, along with the lower tax rate, to a new owner should it decide to sell.

Continue reading

Tenth Circuit Briefing in Important Quiet Title Act Case

The case is Sac and Fox Nation v. Salazar, and is in the Tenth Circuit. Since Carcieri v. Salazar, for a whole bunch of tribes, the Quiet Title Act (QTA) has become a terribly important statute. As readers will recall, the Act expressly preserves the federal government’s sovereign immunity in cases challenging title to Indian trust lands.

Sac and Fox, which involves the Secretary’s taking into trust of the so-called Shriner Tract in Kansas on behalf of the Oklahoma Wyandotte community, is perhaps one of the more ruthless applications of federal sovereign immunity, in that the parties and the courts in prior years had sought to avoid the application of the QTA by keeping open a case even after the land had been taken into trust. When the district court mistakenly closed the case, forcing the plaintiffs to refile, the QTA kicked in with a vengance, forcing the district court to dismiss (see lower court materials here).

Continue reading

Freep on Greektown’s Troubles

From the DFP:

From the outset, Greektown Casino has been days late and millions of dollars short.

The ching-ching-ching of slot machines rang out first at MGM Grand Detroit’s temporary casino in July 1999. Five months later, MotorCity Casino got into the gaming groove.

But it wasn’t until November 2000 that Greektown Casino took its first bets.

In October 2007, MGM Grand unveiled its $700-million permanent casino and hotel. Five months later, MotorCity opened its permanent facility.

But Greektown didn’t open its 400-room hotel until February, the last piece of its permanent building.

This weekend, all three downtown casinos are full of Final Four revelers, with Greektown located closest to the Ford Field games.

Continue reading

Flandreau v. South Dakota IGRA Case

Here are the materials in Flandreau Sioux v. South Dakota, out of the District of South Dakota.

flandreau-v-south-dakota-dct-order

south-dakota-motion-to-dismiss

flandreau-response-brief

south-dakota-reply-brief

Here is the tribe’s claim:

Continue reading

Cook v. Avi Casino Enterprises Cert Petitions — UPDATED

Apparently, there are two cert petitions in this, from the same petitioners but from different lower court judgments.

Ninth Circuit petition (08-929):

Lower court materials

Cert Petition 08-929

Cert Opposition 08-929

Arizona Court of Appeals petition (08-930):

Cert Petition 08-930

Cert Opp 08-930

California v. San Pasqual Cert Petition

This is the same kind of petition California filed a month ago in parallel cases involving Chachil Dehe Band and Rincon Band.

california-v-san-pasqual-band-cert-petition

Connecticut Court Dismisses Dram Shop Action against Mohegans

Maybe another one to watch involving the state law question of whether tribal businesses are immune from Dram Shop actions. The case is Vanstaen-Holland v. Lavigne.

vanstaen-holland-v-lavigne-trial-court-order

Lawyer Threatened with Rule 11 Sanctions If Brings Another Claim against Oneida Indian Nation

Here is the opinion in Smith v. Oneida Employment Services (smith-v-oneida-dct-order), out of the Northern District of New York. Indianz and others have reported on this case, which was an employment claim dismissed on grounds of sovereign immunity. Here is the footnote regarding Rule 11 (and for more discussion on Rule 11 see my paper here):

Although the Court could sanction Plaintiff’s counsel for violating Rule 11 based on several of the factual allegations and legal arguments that he has submitted to the Court in this litigation, it will not do so at this time. However, the Court advises Plaintiff’s counsel that the Court will not tolerate such conduct in the future and will not hesitate to impose sanctions on him for any future violations.