Nooksack Tribal Court Dismisses St. Germain v. Kelly

Here:

St Germain v. Kelly Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and Brief in Support of Motion To Dismiss

St Germain v Kelly Brief in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Cross Motion for Partial Summary Judgment

St Germain v. Kelly Defendants’ Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Cross Motion for Partial Summary Judgment

St Germain v. Kelly Plaintiffs’ Reply re Cross Motion for Partial Summary Judgment

St. Germain v. Kelly Defendants’ Reply to Plaintiffs’ Brief in Opposition to Dimiss Cross Motion for Partial Summary Judgment

St. Germain v. Kelly Order Granting Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and Denying Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment

The court previously had issued a TRO favoring plaintiffs in this matter.

Nooksack Tribal Dismisses Adams v. Kelly II

Here:

Adams v Kelly II Plaintiffs’ Amended Response in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion To Dismiss

Adams v Kelly II Amended Response in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion To Dismiss

Adams v Kelly II Defendants’ Reply to Plaintiffs’ Response in Opposition to Motion to Dismiss

Adams v Kelly II Order Granting Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss

Sault Tribe Renews Motion to Dismiss Michigan’s Lansing Casino Suit in Federal District Court

Here:

49 Renewed Motion to Dismiss

This, in light of the State’s withdraw of its cert petition.

Wheat & Penn-Roco on Maxwell v. County of San Diego

Scott Wheat and Amber Penn-Roco have written a short paper, “No Good Deed Goes Unpunished: Personal Liability Exposure for Tribal Officials in the Wake of Maxwell v. County of San Diego (PDF).

An excerpt:

From firefighting in California, to clearing mudslides in Washington State, tribal governments routinely respond when calamity strikes: both on and off the reservation. Unfortunately, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ recent decision in Maxwell v. County of San Diego, 708 F.3d 1075 (9th Cir. 2013), creates personal liability exposure for the tribal officials carrying out these good deeds. The Supreme Court’s suggested “special justification” for allowing off-reservation tort victims to sue tribal governments in Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community, 572 U.S. ___ (2014), only complicates matters. This article provides a brief background of the Ninth Circuit’s prior holdings concerning the extension of tribal sovereign immunity to tribal employees, a summary of the Maxwell decision, a discussion of the potential implications of the decision, and an overview of precautionary measures to limit Maxwell personal liability exposure.

Clinton White House Papers Release — Seminole Tribe v. Florida & Other Indian Matters

Here (PDF). Interesting stuff, especially the memorandum by now-Justice Elena Kagan starting on page 4.

 

Interior Moves to Dismiss Mackinac Tribe Suit for Federal Recognition

Here:

7-1 US Motion to Dismiss

Complaint here.

Sault Ste. Marie Tribe Cert Opposition Brief

Here:

SSM Cert Opp Brief

Filed right before the decision in Michigan v. Bay Mills came out, so it doesn’t take that case’s outcome into consideration.

 

Materials (So Far) in Idaho v. Coeur d’Alene Texas Hold ‘Em Poker Dispute

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

3-1 Idaho Motion for TRO

15-1 Coeur d’Alene Tribe Motion to Dismiss

16 Coeur d’Alene Opposition to Motion for TRO

20 Shoshone-Bannock Motion to File Amicus Brief

25 Idaho Reply

28 DCT Order Granting Motion to File Amicus Brief

 

National Native News Podcast; Includes Segment on Bay Mills

Here. Second story in the newscast.

Grand Canyon Skywalk Development Defamation Suit Proceeds against PR Firm

Here are the materials in Grand Canyon Skywalk Development LLC v. Steele (D. Nev.):

17 Scutari & Cieslak Motion to Dismiss

20 Tribal Council Defendants Motion to Dismiss

22 GCSD Response to 17

27 GCSD Response to 20

31 Scutari & Cieslak Reply

32 Tribal Council Defendants Reply

63 Notice of Voluntary Dismissal of Cesspooch

64 Notice of Voluntary Dismissal of Tribal Council Defendants

66 DCT Order

Complaint posted here.