Here:
Lower court materials here.
federal court removal and remand
California Valley Miwok Tribe Again Fails at Recovering Foreclosed Land
Here are the materials in Burley v. OneWest Band FSB (E.D. Cal.):
31 DCT Order granting Motion to dismiss
An excerpt:
Plaintiffs Silvia Burley and the California Valley Miwok Tribe (“Miwok Tribe”) brought this action against defendants OneWest Bank, FSB (“OneWest”), Deutsche Bank National Trust Company (“Deutsche Bank”), and Meridian Foreclosure Service (“Meridian”) to recover title over land and damages in connection with the alleged wrongful foreclosure and sale of the plaintiffs’ real property. On August 26, 2014, this court issued an order (“Aug. 26, 2014 Order”) dismissing plaintiffs’ case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and giving plaintiffs’ twenty days to file an amended complaint. (Docket No. 17.) Plaintiffs filed their First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) asserting claims under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (“ECOA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1691, et seq., the Truth in Lending Act (“TILA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1601, et seq., and several state law claims essentially repeated from their original Complaint. (Docket No. 18.)
Prior proceedings are posted here.
Update in Massachusetts Suit over Gaming on Martha’s Vineyard
Here are the new materials in Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah) (D. Mass.):
37 Aquinnah Community Association Motion to Intervene + Proposed Complaint
39 Town of Aquinnah Motion to Intervene
41 Wampanoag Opposition to Town Motion
42 Wampanoag Opposition to Community Association Motion
Update in Massachusetts Suit over Gaming on Martha’s Vineyard
Here are the new materials in Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah) (D. Mass.):
37 Aquinnah Community Association Motion to Intervene + Proposed Complaint
39 Town of Aquinnah Motion to Intervene
41 Wampanoag Opposition to Town Motion
42 Wampanoag Opposition to Community Association Motion
Federal Court Dismisses & Remands Silvia Burley/California Miwok Challenge to Foreclosure of Tribal Building
Here are the materials in Burley v. OneWest Bank (E.D. Cal.):
14 Onewest Bank Response to Order to Show Cause
15 Burley Response to Order to Show Cause
Prior post with materials here.
Materials in Contract Dispute over Tribal Court Jurisdiction between Mississippi Choctaw and Health Care Vendor
Here are the materials so far in Mississippi Administrative Services Inc. v. Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians (S.D. Miss.):
9 Response to Motion to Dismiss
Materials in Silvia Burley/California Valley Miwok Tribe Challenge to Foreclosure of Residence/Tribal Govt. Building
Here are the materials in Burley v. OneWest Bank (E.D. Cal.):
And here are materials in the related matter, Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. Burley (E.D. Cal.):
Tribal Jurisdiction Matter Remanded to State Court Because Tribe Waited Too Long to Remove to Federal Court
Here are materials in Harvey v. Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation (D. Utah):
2-1 Amended State Court Complaint
15 Plaintiffs Motion to Remand
Federal Court Finds Jurisdiction in Tribal Dispute with Massachusetts over Regulation of Gaming on Martha Vineyard
Here are the materials so far in Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah) (D. Mass.):
18 Massachusetts Motion to Remand
21 Opposition to Motion to Remand
An excerpt:
This lawsuit involves a dispute between the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and a federally recognized Indian tribe as to who has regulatory jurisdiction over civil gaming on Indian lands on Martha’s Vineyard. The Aquinnah Wampanoag Tribe and related entities have taken steps to commence commercial gaming operations on tribal lands without a license from the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts contends that by doing so, the Tribe violated a 1983 settlement agreement that subject the lands in question to state civil and criminal jurisdiction. Count 1 of the complaint alleges breach of contract, and Count 2 seeks a declaratory judgment.
The Commonwealth filed suit in state court on December 2, 2013. On December 30, 2013, defendants removed the action to this Court on the basis of federal-question and supplemental jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1367. The Commonwealth has moved to remand the matter to state court. For the reasons set forth below, the motion will be denied.
Additional Update in Luckerman v. Narragansett
Here are additional materials in Luckerman v. Narragansett Indian Tribe (D. R.I.):
29 Motion to Correct the Record
34 DCT Order on Amending the Record
Meanwhile, the tribe has appealed the sovereign immunity issue here to the First Circuit.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.