Here are the materials in Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation v. Factory Mutual Ins. Co. (Conn. Super. Ct.):
Connecticut Superior Court
Sovereign Lending Tribe Wins Partial Victory in Conn. SCT
Here is the opinion in Great Plains Lending LLC v. State of Conn. Dept. of Banking:
Briefs here.
Pequot Tribal Elder Housing Suit against Tribe Dismissed
Here are the materials in Colebut v. Butler (Conn. Super.):
Connecticut SCT Briefs in Great Plains Lending LLC v. State of Connecticut Dept. of Banking
Connecticut Court Holds Tribal Business is Immune from State Dept. of Banking Authority
Here are the materials in Great Plains Lending LLC v. State of Connecticut Dept. of Banking (Conn. Super.):
Department’s Motion to Dismiss
Superior Ct Order Denying Motion to Dismiss
Great Plains Brief on the Merits
Schaghticoke Suit against Connecticut to Proceed
Here are the materials in Schagticoke Tribal Nation v. State of Connecticut:
The complaint is here.
Schaghticoke Indians Want $600 Million For Lost Land
Link: Hartford Courant article by Kenneth R. Gosselin
Download(PDF): Complaint in re Schaghticoke Tribal Nation v. State of Connecticut (Oct. 13, 2016)
Excerpt from article:
In a lawsuit filed in Hartford on Thursday, the Kent tribe alleges the state took the land it was managing for the Schaghticokes — eventually amounting to 2,000 acres — without compensating the tribe. The lawsuit contends the tribe is owed at least $613 million, but the tribe says it expects that number to rise because it has not been able to determine the value of all the tracts.
Connecticut Superior Court (again) Acknowledges Tribal Immunity in Great Plains Lending v. State Dept. of Banking
Here are the materials:
By of background, in November 2015, the Connecticut Superior Court issued a decision in the Otoe-Missouria Tribe’s favor, remanding a prior state agency decision which purported to subject the Tribe’s lending entities and Chairman Shotton to civil and injunctive damages. Following this ruling, the Connecticut Department of Banking attempted to run afoul of the Court’s prior decision and potentially subject the Tribe to participating in its administrative proceedings through discovery and possible depositions.
On August 31, 2016, the Connecticut Superior Court rejected this attempt and issued another ruling the Tribe’s favor and reaffirming its decision from November 2016 and granting the Tribe’s most recent challenge by issuing another strong decision in its favor. In doing so, the Court explicitly stated that the Tribe’s rights were “substantially prejudiced” as a result of the Department’s actions.
Otoe-Missouria Tribal Chairman Brings Civil Rights Action against Connecticut Dept. of Banking
Here is the complaint in Shotton v. Pitkin (W.D. Okla.):
An excerpt:
Plaintiff brings this action as a result of unlawful enforcement actions taken by Defendants against Plaintiff and Defendants’ entry of a state administrative order imposing a civil penalty of $700,000 against Plaintiff in his individual capacity and unlawfully restraining his conduct without due process of law and in violation of his individual right to immunity as a tribal official.
Our post on a related suit in Connecticut Superior Court action is here.
Otoe-Missouria Tribal Lender Appeals Connecticut Dept. of Banking Fines
Here are the materials in Great Plains Lending LLC v. Connecticut Dept. of Banking (Conn. Super.):
News coverage here: “Oklahoma tribe appeals $1.5 million in payday lending fines.”
You must be logged in to post a comment.