Here is the motion in State of Arizona v. Tohono O’odham Nation (D. Ariz.):
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-348 reads:
A. In addition to any costs that are awarded as prescribed by statute, a court shall award fees and other expenses to any party other than this state or a city, town or county that prevails by an adjudication on the merits in any of the following:
1. A civil action brought by the state or a city, town or county against the party.
Here are the materials in State of Arizona v. Tohono O’odham Nation (D. Ariz.):
An excerpt:
For reasons explained below, the Court concludes that §§ 201(1) and 201(2) cannot be used by Plaintiffs to establish an enforceable oral agreement that the Nation would not open a casino in the Phoenix metropolitan area. The Court has already held that the Compact between the State and the Nation includes no such agreement, and that even Plaintiffs’ extrinsic evidence does not make the Compact’s terms reasonably susceptible to such a reading. Doc. 216. The Court now concludes that the Compact is a fully integrated written agreement under Chapter 9 of the Restatement, and that such an agreement between the parties forecloses any separate oral agreement. As a result, the Court will grant summary judgment in favor of the Nation on Plaintiffs’ § 201(2) claim and deny Plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration on the § 201(1) claim.
This concludes the trial court proceedings, mostly concluded in the court’s order granting summary judgment on most claims we posted about here.
Here is yesterday’s order in Arizona v. Tohono O’odham Nation (D. Ariz.):
An excerpt:
Defendant Tohono O’odham Nation (the “Nation”) plans to construct and operate a major casino on unincorporated land within the outer boundaries of the City of Glendale, Arizona, which is in the greater Phoenix metropolitan area. The State of Arizona, the Gila River Indian Community, and the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community (collectively “Plaintiffs”) argue that the proposed casino violates the 2002 Gaming Compact between the State of Arizona and the Nation (“the Compact”), and ask the Court to enjoin the casino’s construction. The parties have filed cross-motions for summary judgment, and the Court heard oral arguments on April 9, 2013. For reasons explained below, the Court will grant the Nation’s motion for summary judgment on all but one of Plaintiffs’ claims, and will require additional briefing on the remaining claim.
Briefs are here.
Here are the materials so far:
Tohono O’odham Motion for Summary J
Arizona & Gila River & Salt River Cross-Motion
Update (5/8/13):
The complaint is here.
News coverage from Pechanga.
Turtle Talk 