Federal Court Issues Preliminary Injunction in Picayune Casino Dispute

Here are the materials in State of California v. Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians (E.D. Cal.):

9 McDonald Faction Opposition to TRO

10 Unification Council Response to TRO

25 California Motion for PI

30 Unification Council Response to PI Motion

31 NIGC Materials

33 McDonald Faction Response to PI Motion

42 California Reply in Support of PI Motion

48 DCT Order Granting PI

From the order:

The Court orders that the Tribe, and all if its officers, agents, servants, employees and attorneys, and all persons acting under the Tribe’s direction and control, including all  groups currently claiming to constitute the tribal government, are hereby enjoined and  restrained from:

1. Attempting to disturb, modify or otherwise change the circumstances that were in effect at the Casino as of the afternoon of October 8, 2014. This prohibition includes, without limitation, attempting to repossess, or take control of the Casino in whole or in part. Payments in the ordinary course of business, including mandatory fees to the gaming commission actually supervising the Casino’s operations on October 8, 2014, and per capita tribal distributions based upon the Tribe’s membership list as of December 1, 2010, that are made in equal amounts, are not violative of this Injunction. No discretionary payments shall be made to any group claiming to be the duly constituted tribal council or claiming control over tribal matters.

2. Deploying tribal police or other armed personnel of any nature within 1,000 yards from the Casino, the property on which the Casino is located, and tribal properties surrounding the Casino, including the adjacent hotel and nearby tribal offices (collectively, “Tribal Properties”). This prohibition includes weapons of any nature or sort such as, by way of example but not limited to, firearms, tasers, knives, clubs, and batons. The only armed personnel allowed within the Tribal Properties are members of federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies who are acting within the scope of their official duties.

3. Possessing, carrying, displaying, or otherwise having firearms on the Tribal Properties.

4. Removing documents or other property from the Casino, or continuing to possess, or possessing, documents or other property removed from the Casino during and after the morning of October 9, 2014. All such documents or other property that were removed and have not been returned shall be returned immediately.

5. Operating the Casino unless and until it is established before this Court that the public health and safety of Casino patrons, employees, and tribal members can be adequately protected from the violent confrontations and threats of violent confrontation among the tribal groups disputing leadership of the Tribe and control of the Casino. This prohibition shall have no further force and effect if the NIGC issues an order lifting its Closure Order and, within one-half court day thereof, the State does not object to reopening the Casino.

This preliminary injunction will remain in effect until resolution of the case by settlement or judgment or the Court’s further order.

TRO materials are here and here.

Second Circuit Briefs in Citizens against Casino Gambling in Erie County v. Hogen (FINAL)

Here:

Final CACGEC Principal Brief

Final Federal Brief

Final Seneca Amicus Brief

Final CACGEC Reply Brief

Final Federal Reply Brief

Lower court materials here.

Gaming Compact dispute, sales tax and liquor disputes between the Citizen Potawatomi Nation and the State of Oklahoma

Here are the materials in In re Revocation of Licenses/Permits of Citizen Potawatomi Nation (Okla. Tax Commission):

Stipulations-filed with exhibits

OTC opening brief filed

CPN Motion to Dismiss or Stay

OTC Response

L – Doerflinger – LeClaire 10-24-14

L – Doerflinger 10-24-14

L – Miller 10-24-14

Ninth Circuit Briefs in State of Arizona v. Tohono O’odham Nation

Here:

Arizona Brief

Salt River & Gila River Brief

TON Answer Brief

Arizona Reply Brief

Salt River & Gila River Reply Brief

Lower court materials here.

 

Seventh Circuit Briefs in State of Wisconsin v. Ho-Chunk Nation

Here:

Ho-Chunk Nation Opening Brief

NIGA Amicus Brief

Wisconsin Brief

Ho-Chunk Nation Reply Brief

Lower court materials here.

Ninth Circuit Briefs in State of Idaho v. Coeur d’Alene Tribe

Here:

Coeur d’Alene Tribe Opening Brief

Shoshone-Bannock Tribes Amicus Brief

State Brief

Tribe Reply

Oral argument audio, video.

Lower court materials here, here, here, and here.

Navajo Gaming Sues State Judge to Enjoin Personal Injury Suit in State Court

Here are the materials in Navajo Nation v. Aragon (D. N.M.):

1 Complaint

1-1 State Court Complaint

4 Navajo Motion for TRO

Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment Briefing in City of Duluth v. National Indian Gaming Commission

Here:

25 Duluth Motion for Summary J

26 US Cross Motion for Summary J

27-1 Fond du Lac Proposed Amicus Bref

30 Duluth Reply

33 US Reply

The materials on the federal government’s motion to dismiss are here.

Complaint is here.

 

Federal Court Invalidates Part 291 Secretarial Procedures in Pojoaque Pueblo Case

Here are the materials in State of New Mexico v. Dept. of Interior (D. N.M.):

37 Interior Motion for Summary J

39 New Mexico Motion for Summary J

40 Pojoaque Opposition

41 New Mexico Opposition

42 Interior Opposition

43 Pojoaque Reply

44 Interior Reply

46 New Mexico Reply

48 DCT Order

An excerpt:

Plaintiff State of New Mexico challenges the Department of the Interior and the Secretary of the Interior’s legal authority to implement regulations found in 25 C.F.R. § 291 (“Secretarial Procedures” or “Part 291 regulations”). The Secretarial Procedures, if adopted, would allow the Pueblo of Pojoaque to conduct Class III gaming on its reservation. New Mexico asks this Court to declare the Secretarial Procedures invalid because they conflict with the unambiguous terms of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (“IGRA”), 25 U.S.C. § 2701 et seq. and violate New Mexico’s sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment.

California Sues Chukchansi for Emergency Relief (Updated with Federal Court Closure Order)

Here is Friday’s complaint in State of California v. Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians (E.D. Cal.):

1 Complaint

An excerpt:

This action seeks emergency and other appropriate injunctive relief to prevent an imminent threat to the public health and safety. Opposing tribal groups of the Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians of California (Chukchansi) claim to constitute the tribal government and have the right to control the Chukchansi Gold Resort and Casino (Casino) located in Madera County, California. Even though the State gives deference to Chukchansi’s sovereignty to resolve its intra-tribal dispute, public health, safety, and welfare have become threatened. Supported by armed security forces, the groups have taken actions to occupy, control, or forcibly enter facilities in, adjacent to, and near the Casino located in Coarsegold, California. This is an imminent threat to the public health and safety of Chukchansi’s members, the Casino’s patrons and employees, and the State’s residents. Therefore, this Court should issue orders to protect the public, including temporarily restraining, and permanently enjoining, attempts to take control, or possession, of the Casino and related or nearby facilities, deploying armed personnel at or near the Casino, and carrying firearms at the Casino and related tribal properties; and, further prohibiting operation of the Casino unless and until it is established before this Court that the public health and safety of Casino patrons, employees, and tribal members can be adequately protected from the violent confrontations and threats of violent confrontation among the tribal factions disputing leadership of the Tribe and control of the Casino.

Update:

2-2 California Motion for TRO

2-3 Declaration

5 DCT Order Granting TRO