Federal Court Dismisses Suit against Tribal Lending Entity Owned by Tunica-Biloxi Tribe

Here are the materials in Everette v. Mitchum (D. Md.):

21 MobiLoans Motion to Dismiss

22-1 Riverbend Finance Motion to Dismiss

30-1 Mitchem Motion to Dismiss

40 Response to MobiLoans

41 Response to 3052 Mitchem Reply

53 Riverbend Finance Reply

57 MobiLoans Reply

59-1 Scott Tucker Motion to Dismiss

60 Response to 59

62 Everette v. Mitchem (D.MD) Memorandum Order

Florida COA Materials in MMMG LLC v. Seminole Tribe of Florida

Here:

MMMG Opening Brief

Seminole Answer Brief

MMMG Reply

Federal Court Dismisses Access Fees Suit against Two Tribal Telecommunications Companies

Here are the relevant materials in MCI Communications Services Inc. v. Arizona Telephone Co. (N.D. Tex.):

37 Tribal Telecommunications Companies Motion to Dismiss

41 Opposition

42 Reply

48 Surreply

49 Final Tribal Reply

50 DCT Order

An excerpt:

In this action by two interexchange carriers (“IXCs”) seeking relief related to access fees that local exchange carriers (“LECs”) charge the IXCs to provide access services for wireless intraMTA calls, three defendants move to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) based on tribal immunity. For the reasons explained, the court grants the motion and also grants plaintiffs leave to replead.

Tenth Circuit Briefs in Amerind Risk Management v. Blackfeet Housing

Here:

Amerind Risk Opening Brief

Blackfeet Housing Appellee Brief

Lower court materials here.

Federal Court Holds ERISA Abrogates Tribal Immunity

Here are the materials in Coppe v. Sac & Fox Casino Healthcare Plan (D. Kan.):

32 Motion to Dismiss

34 Opposition

37 Reply

47 DCT Order

An excerpt:

The statutory language of ERISA in 29 U.S.C. § 1002(32) demonstrates that Congress specifically intended for Indian tribes to maintain sovereign immunity for some employee benefit plans and to abrogate it for others. The language makes it clear that the exemption from the requirements of ERISA applies if all the employees in the plan established by an Indian tribe are “in the performance of essential governmental functions but not in the performance of commercial activities [whether or not an essential government function].”

Congress’s 2006 amendments to ERISA constitute an unequivocal waiver of sovereign immunity for tribal employee plans that perform commercialfunctions. Even before those amendments, circuit courts found ERISA applicable to Indian tribes whose employees performed non-governmental functions. Lumber Indus. Pension Fund v. Warm Springs Forest Prods. Indus., 939 F.2d 683 (9th Cir. 1991); Smart, 868 F.2d at 929.

D.C. Circuit Briefs in Mackinac Tribe v. Jewell

Here:

Tribe Opening Brief

US Answer Brief

Reply

Lower court briefs here.

Sharply Split Michigan Appeals Court Rules in Apparent Authority/Sovereign Immunity Question

Here are the materials in Star Tickets v. Chumash Resort Casino:

Opinion

Opinion — Gleicher Dissent

Chumash Opening Brief

Star Tickets Brief on Appeal

Reply Brief

Saginaw Chippewa Amicus Brief

Federal Court Quashes Third Party Subpoena of Fort Belkap Indian Community Officers and Docs

Here are the materials in Matt v. United States (D. Mont.):

26 Motion to Compel

37 Fort Belknap Motion to Quash

40-1 Opposition to Motio to Quash

42 Fort Belknap Reply

45 DCT Order Granting Motion to Quash

The underlying complaint against the US is here:

1 Complaint

News coverage.

Illinois Appellate Court Holds Tribe Retained Immunity Despite Ambiguous Contract Language

Here is the unpublished opinion in ACF Leasing v. Oneida Seven Generations Corp. (PDF).

Briefs:

Appellant Brief

Tribal Response Brief

Reply Brief

California Court of Appeals Orders Depublication of Cosentino Opinion

Here:

Cosentino

Depublication briefs here, here, and here.

Opinion here.