Here are the available materials in Koi Nation of Northern California v. City of Clearlake:
City Answer to State Amicus Brief
City Answer to Tribal Amicus Brief
California COA Orders Tribal Consultation under CEQA
California Court of Appeals — First District
Self v. Cher-Ae Heights Indian Indian Community of the Trinidad Rancheria [immovable property exception]
California COA Dismisses Coyote Valley Band Appeals under Disentitlement Doctrine
Here are the materials in Findleton v. Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians:
Findleton Brief A158171 A158172 A158173
California COA Briefs in Findleton v. Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians
California COA Rejects Immovable Property Exception to Tribal Immunity
Here is the opinion in Self v. Cher-AE Heights Indian Community of the Trinidad Rancheria:
Briefs:
California COA Affirms Immunity of Miami Tribe Business
Here are the materials in In re Internet Lending Cases, AKA Rosas v. AMG Services, Inc.:
California SCT & COA Materials in Huber Tax Case
Here are the materials in Huber v. People ex rel. Becerra (Cal.):
Huber-Navarro-Petition-for-Review-04-Apr-Apr-2019-STAMPED
And in People ex rel. Becerra v. Huber (Cal. Ct. App.) [we posted materials here]:
Navarro-Appellant’s-Opening-Supplemental-Brief-15-Nov-2018-FILE-STAMPED
Navarro-Appellant’s-Petition-for-Rehearing-09-Oct-2018-FILE-STAMPED
Navarro-Appellant’s-Supplemental-Reply-Brief-06-Dec-2018-FILE-STAMPED
California Appellate Court Holds State Taxes Imposed on Tribal Member Not Preempted
Here are the materials in People ex rel. Becerra v. Huber (Cal. Ct. App.):
appellant-supplemental-brief.pdf
California COA Reinstates Lawsuit against Tribal Lawyers
Here is the unpublished opinion in Fernandez v. Marston:
An excerpt:
Two unwitting pawns in a bitter, protracted leadership dispute between rival factions of an Indian tribe, appellants Shawn Fernandez and Brian Auchenbach, took part in a paramilitary raid of the tribe’s casino offices in order to oust a competing tribal faction of possession. The two men believed they had been lawfully deputized as police officers for the tribe, had full legal authority to engage in the operation, and would not face any adverse legal consequences or criminal charges as a result. They believed this, because attorneys for the tribal faction that hired them as police officers assured them it was true.
It wasn’t. Contrary to counsel’s assurances, Fernandez and Auchenbach were arrested by the Madera County Sheriff’s Department, along with the others who participated in the raid, and were charged with 29 felony counts. The two men then brought this lawsuit against the attorneys involved, alleging causes of action for attorney malpractice, negligence and fraud, premised on the attorneys’ false assurances to them concerning the validity of the tribal police force that had hired them and the legality of the armed raid they took part in.
The trial court granted the attorneys’ motion to strike their complaint under the anti-SLAPP statute (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.161). We reverse, because this lawsuit does not arise from any activity protected by that statute.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.