Federal Court Enjoins Ho-Chunk Poker as a Class III Game

Here are the materials in State of Wisconsin v. Ho-Chunk Nation (W.D. Wis.):

25 HCN Brief

22 Wisconsin Brief

29 Wisconsin Response Brief

32 Ho-Chunk Response Brief

35 DCT Order

An excerpt:

The state of Wisconsin has brought this case to enjoin defendant Ho–Chunk Nation from offering electronic poker at Ho–Chunk Gaming Madison (formerly DeJope), the Ho–Chunk Nation’s gaming facility in Madison, Wisconsin. The question raised in the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment is whether Ho–Chunk Nation’s poker game violates a compact with the state. The answer to that question turns on whether electronic poker qualifies as a “class II” or “class III” game under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Class III games are prohibited by the compact except under certain conditions not present in this case, but class II games are permitted. Because I conclude that Ho–Chunk Nation’s electronic poker game is a class III game, I am granting the state’s motion for summary judgment and denying Ho–Chunk Nation’s motion.

Michigan’s Response to Sault Tribe Renewed Motion to Dismiss

Here are updated materials in State of Michigan v. Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians (W.D. Mich.):

53-1 Michigan Motion to Revise DCT Order Dismissing Tribal Officials

55 Michigan Response to Motion to Dismiss

Sault Tribe’s motion is here.

Tenth Circuit Supplemental Briefs in Oklahoma v. Hobia re: Bay Mills Decision

Here:

Oklahoma Supplemental Brief re Bay Mills

Tribal Supplemental Brief re Bay Mills

The Tenth Circuit previously abated this matter pending the outcome in Michigan v. Bay Mills.

Opening Eleventh Circuit Briefs in Alabama v. PCI Gaming

Here:

Alabama Opening Brief

State of Michigan et al. Amicus Brief

Lower court materials here.

Update in Stand Up for California v. Jewell

Here:

85 Motion to Supplement Admin Record

89 US Opposition

92 Reply re Motion to Supplement

Prior post here.

Update in City of Duluth v. NIGC

Here is Duluth’s motion for summary judgment:

25 Duluth Motion for Summary J

Prior materials here.

New Student Scholarship on Off-Reservation Gaming

The UNLV Gaming Law Journal has published “Fencing the Buffalo: Off-Reservation Gaming and Possible Amendments to Section 20 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act” (PDF).

 

Federal Court Finds Jurisdiction in Tribal Dispute with Massachusetts over Regulation of Gaming on Martha Vineyard

Here are the materials so far in Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah) (D. Mass.):

1 Notice of Removal

18 Massachusetts Motion to Remand

21 Opposition to Motion to Remand

25-1 Massachusetts Reply

31 DCT Order

An excerpt:

This lawsuit involves a dispute between the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and a federally recognized Indian tribe as to who has regulatory jurisdiction over civil gaming on Indian lands on Martha’s Vineyard. The Aquinnah Wampanoag Tribe and related entities have taken steps to commence commercial gaming operations on tribal lands without a license from the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts contends that by doing so, the Tribe violated a 1983 settlement agreement that subject the lands in question to state civil and criminal jurisdiction. Count 1 of the complaint alleges breach of contract, and Count 2 seeks a declaratory judgment.

The Commonwealth filed suit in state court on December 2, 2013. On December 30, 2013, defendants removed the action to this Court on the basis of federal-question and supplemental jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1367. The Commonwealth has moved to remand the matter to state court. For the reasons set forth below, the motion will be denied.

Federal Court Sends Coeur d’Alene Tribe Poker Dispute to Arbitration

Here are the updated materials in State of Idaho v. Coeur d’Alene Tribe (D. Idaho):

33 Coeur d’Alene Tribe Reply

35 DCT Order

Prior briefs here.

Ninth Circuit Grants En Banc Review in Big Lagoon Rancheria v. State of California

Here:

2014 0611 Order Granting Petition for Rehearing En Banc

En banc petition here. Supporting amicus briefs here.

Lower court materials here.