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.

Eleventh Circuit Reaffirms Tribal Sovereign Immunity

The case is Freemanville Water System, Inc. v. Poarch Band of Creek Indians (opinion). Our post on the district court case is here. An excerpt:

After a hard look at the statute the only thing that is unmistakably clear to us is that the statutory language does not make it unmistakably clear that Congress intended to abrogate tribal sovereign immunity from lawsuits claiming a violation of the anti-curtailment provision [of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act]. See Kimel, 528 U.S. at 73, 120 S. Ct. at 640.

And here are the appellate briefs:

Continue reading

White Earth Band Wins Tax Case against Mahnomen County

The case is White Earth Band v. County of Mahnomen, in the District of Minnesota. It involves the interpretation of the White Earth Lands Claims Settlement Act. Here are the materials:

white-earth-motion-for-summary-judgment

mahnomen-county-response-and-cross-motion

white-earth-reply-brief

dct-order-granting-summ-j-to-white-earth

Coushatta Tribe v. Meyer & Assoc. a “Petition to Watch”

SCOTUSBlog lists Coushatta Tribe v. Meyer & Assoc. as a petition to watch for the April 3, 2009 conference. A cursory review of the cert petition shows that there may be a conflict in the state courts about whether the tribal court exhaustion doctrine enunciated by National Farmers Union and Iowa Mutual applies to state courts. The conflict seems to be with the Connecticut courts, and perhaps the New York and Wisconsin courts (though there are good reasons to doubt whether those courts have really embraced the doctrine), which have held that the tribal court exhaustion doctrine applies to its courts. Other courts — Louisiana, Arizona, and others — have rejected the application of the doctrine to their courts.

My sense is that the Court will deny this petition, though it is definitely worth watching. Three key reasons: (1) Louisiana’s course of action was to treat this common law doctrine as applying only to federal courts, preserving its own choice whether or not to adopt this federal court doctrine (a choice it made in the negative, just as Connecticut chose to adopt it, presumably of its own free will), making this dispute more a state law question than a federal law question; (2) the tribe is the petitioner; and (3) this is a common law case, rather than a federal statutory interpretation case or a federal constitutional case.

If a state court followed National Farmers Union, complaining loudly that it had no choice because of federal bullying or something, then there probably would be more Supreme Court interest. There doesn’t seem to be a federal government interest in the tribal court exhaustion doctrine that would be apparent to the Court, a serious problem I suspect is behind much of the Court’s recent 25-year retreat from its earlier federal Indian law jurisprudence.

A potential wildcard is that the state court’s opinion seems to run a little roughshod over the tribe’s immunity, but this seems to be limited to the tribe’s own laws, something that wouldn’t be likely to interest the Court.

From SCOTUSblog:

Continue reading

GTB Revenue Sharing News Coverage

From the Traverse City Record-Eagle:

TRAVERSE CITY — For at least four years, Toni Ferris’ special education students built self-esteem and coordination through regular swimming lessons.

But this year’s lessons nearly didn’t happen: The grant-supported program, designed for students with mild cognitive impairments in Traverse City Area Public Schools, didn’t receive funding by the start of the school year.

So Ferris, their teacher at the former Glenn Loomis Elementary, applied again, and received about $9,500 from the Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians shortly before Valentine’s Day.

The funds will help about 50 students with disabilities swim at the Grand Traverse County Civic Center pool from late April through mid-June.

Continue reading