Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Contract Claims against Battle Mountain Band

Here are the materials in Platform 10 LLC v. Battle Mountain Band of the Te-Moak Tribe of Western Shoshone Indians of Nevada:

Unpublished Opinion

[no other briefs filed]

Lower court materials here.

Nevada Federal Court Dismisses Gaming-Related Contract Breach Action against Battle Mountain Band of the Te-Moak Tribe of Western Shoshone Indians

Here are the materials in Platform 10 LLC v. Battle Mountain Band of the Te-Moak Tribe of Western Shoshone Indians of Nevada (D. Nev.):

1 Complaint

14 Motion for Default Judgment

16 DCT Order


Contract Breach Complaint: Ceridian HCM Inc. v. Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians

Here are the materials in Ceridian HCM, Inc. v. Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians (D. Minn.):

1 Complaint

5 DCT Order to Show Cause

An excerpt:

In the Complaint, Ceridian HCM alleged that it “is a Delaware corporation with its principal office” in Minnesota; that Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians “is a federally recognized Indian tribe” that has its principal office in California; that Chumash Casino Resort Enterprise “is an unincorporated business enterprise wholly owned by” Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians; and that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. It appears that jurisdiction under § 1332 does not exist because “Indian tribes are neither foreign states nor citizens of any state.” Gaming World Int’l, Ltd. v. White Earth Band of Chippewa Indians, 317 F.3d 840, 847 (8th Cir. 2003) (citations omitted); see Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Tribal Court of Spirit Lake Indian Reservation, 495 F.3d 1017, 1020-21 (8th Cir. 2007);Oglala Sioux Tribe v. C & W Enters., Inc., 487 F.3d 1129, 1130 n.2 (8th Cir. 2007).

The Court grants Ceridian HCM an opportunity to submit a memorandum of law that explains why this action should not be dismissed for lack for subject-matter jurisdiction. SeeHertz Corp. v. Friend, 559 U.S. 77, 94, 130 S. Ct. 1181, 175 L. Ed. 2d 1029 (2010) (“Courts have an independent obligation to determine whether subject-matter jurisdiction exists, even when no party challenges it.”); Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp., 546 U.S. 500, 506, 126 S. Ct. 1235, 163 L. Ed. 2d 1097 (2006) (“The objection that a federal court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction may be raised by a party, or by a court on its own initiative, at any stage in the litigation, even after trial and the entry of judgment.” (citation omitted)). Ceridian HCM shall file the memorandum within seven days of the date of this Order.

Illinois Federal Court Vacates Default Judgment against Ponca Tribe — No Diversity Jurisdiction

Here are the materials in Merit Management v. Ponca (N.D. Ill.):

Ponca Motion to Vacate

Merit Management Response

Ponca Reply

DCT Order Granting Ponca Motion to Vacate

Federal Sexual Harassment Claims against Miss. Band Choctaw Dismissed

Here are the materials in Copeland v. Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians dba Silverstar Casino (S.D. Miss.):

DCT Order Dismissing Copeland Complaint

Mississippi Band Motion to Dismiss

Tribal Court Record Part 1

Tribal Court Record Part 3

Federal Court Slip and Fall Action against Eastern Band Cherokee Dismissed

Here is the opinion in Madewell v. Harrah’s (W.D. N.C.): DCT Order Dismissing Slip and Fall Claim