Federal Court Allows Seneca Trespass Action against New York Thruway to Proceed, Allows Interlocutory Appeal

Here are the materials in Seneca Nation v. Cuomo (W.D. N.Y.):

41 Seneca Supplemental Brief

44 New York Supplemental Brief

47 Seneca Supplemental Brief

48 DCT Order

Earlier briefs here.

Federal Magistrate Recommends Dismissal of Shinnecock Members’ Off-Reservation Fishing Rights Suit [again]

Here are the updated materials in Silva v. Farrish (E.D. N.Y.):

83-6 Suffolk County Motion for Summary Judgment

83-10 Opposition

83-12 Reply

84-8 New York Motion for Summary Judgment

84-13 Opposition

84-14 Reply

89 Magistrate Report

Prior post here.

Case Materials in Seneca Nation v. Andrew Cuomo, et. al. (W.D.N.Y) [New York Thruway Easement]


Doc. 1_Complaint (04.11.18)

Doc. 16 and 16-1_Defs’ Motion to Dismiss (06.05.18)

Doc. 22_Pltf’s Response in Opp to Defs MTD (08.10.18)

23 Reply

29 Magistrate Report


32 Objections

36 Response

37 Reply

Federal Court Allows Bishop Paiute Suit against Inyo County re: Tribal Law Enforcement Authority to Proceed

Here are the materials in Bishop Paiute Tribe v. Inyo County (E.D. Cal.):

45-1 inyo county mtd

46-1 sheriff mtd

49 opposition

47-1 inyo da mtd

61 dct order

Tenth Circuit Strikes Down Part 291 Secretarial Procedures

Here is the opinion in State of New Mexico v. Dept. of Interior.

Briefs here.

Seminole Tribe Prevails in Dispute with Florida over Banked Games

Here are the materials in Seminole Tribe of Florida v. State of Florida (N.D. Fla.):








California v. Pauma Band Cert Petition

Here is the petition in California v. Pauma Band of Luiseño Mission Indians of the Pauma and Yuima Reservation:

Cal v Pauma Cert Petn

Question presented:

In Edelman v. Jordan, 415 U.S. 651 (1974), this Court held that a waiver of state sovereign immunity must be “stated ‘by the most express language or by such overwhelming implication from the text as will leave no room for any other reasonable construction.’” Id. at 673 (alteration omitted). This case concerns a gaming compact between the State of California and the Pauma Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pauma and Yuima Reservation. Both parties waived their sovereign immunity from suits arising under the compact, but only to the extent that “[n]either side makes any claim for monetary damages (that is, only injunctive, specific performance, including enforcement of a provision of this Compact requiring payment of money to one or another of the parties, or declaratory relief is sought) . . . .” App. 28a. A divided panel of the Ninth Circuit held that this limited waiver, which also appears in gaming compacts between California and 57 other tribes, waived the State’s immunity with respect to an award of $36.2 million in restitution.

The question presented is: Whether, under Edelman, the language of the limited waiver—which expressly excludes claims for “monetary damages” and references only injunctive relief, specific performance, and declaratory relief— waived the State’s sovereign immunity with respect to the district court’s monetary award.

Lower court materials here (panel, en banc).