Here are the materials in Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe v. Gerlach (D. S.D.);:
38 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
50 Flandreau Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
51 Opposition to Flandreau Motion
We posted the complaint here.
IGRA
Kansas’ Challenge to Quapaw Trust Land Acquisition Dismissed
Here are the materials in State of Kansas ex rel. Schmidt v. National Indian Gaming Commission (D. Kan.):
Ninth Circuit Denies En Banc Review in Pauma Compact Dispute, Issues Amended Order
Here is the amended order in Pauma Band of Luiseño Indians v. State of California.
En banc petitions here:
Eleventh Circuit Rules in Favor of Poarch Band in Gaming Dispute with Alabama
Here is the opinion in State of Alabama v. PCI Gaming Authority.
Briefs are here.
Federal Court Dismisses Employment Suit against San Manuel
Here are the materials in Harris v. San Manuel Band of Mission Indians (C.D. Cal.):
Sault Tribe Motion to Dismiss Michigan Gaming Suit
Here are the new materials in the case captioned State of Michigan v. Payment (W.D. Mich.):
2015-03-20 Brief in Support of Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint
2015-03-20 Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint
71 Michigan Response to Motion to Dismiss
The state’s amended complaint is here.
Massachusetts Gaming Claims against Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head Survive Motions to Dismiss; Counterclaims Do, Too
Here are the updated materials in Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah) (D. Mass.):
65 Massachusetts Opposition to Rule 19 Motion
67 Aquinnah-Gay Head Community Opposition to 11th Amendment Motion to Dismiss
71 Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head Reply in Support of Rule 19 Motion
72 Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head Reply in Support of Motion to Dismiss on Immunity Grounds
77 Massachusetts Motion to Dismiss
86 Massachusetts Officials Motion to Dismiss
87 Wampanoag Tribe Opposition to Massachusetts Immunity Motion
95 DCT Order Denying Motions to Dismiss
An excerpt:
This lawsuit involves a dispute between the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and a federally recognized Indian tribe concerning regulatory jurisdiction over civil gaming on Indian lands on Martha’s Vineyard. The Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah) and related entities have taken steps to commence commercial gaming operations on tribal lands without a license from the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth contends that operating gaming facilities without such a license would violate a 1983 settlement agreement that subjects the lands in question to state civil and criminal jurisdiction (and thus subjects them to state laws regulating gaming). 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, the Tribe removed the action to this Court on the basis of federal-question and supplemental jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1367. On August 6, 2014, the Court granted motions to intervene by the Town of Aquinnah and the Aquinnah/Gay Head Community Association (“AGHCA”). The Tribe has moved to dismiss the AGHCA complaint on the basis of sovereign immunity and for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; it has further moved to dismiss all three complaints (with leave to amend) for failure to join the United States as a required party.
On October 24, 2014, the Tribe filed an amended answer that included a counterclaim against the Commonwealth and counterclaims against three third-party defendants (all of whom are officials of the Commonwealth). Plaintiff and third-party defendants have moved to dismiss the counterclaims on the grounds of sovereign immunity (as to the counterclaims against the Commonwealth) and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
For the reasons stated below, the motions of the Tribe will be denied and the motion of counterclaim-defendants will be granted in part and denied in part.
We posted motions to dismiss here. Materials on the state court removal and remand motions here. Complaint here.
State of Michigan Sues Sault Tribe Officials–Amended Complaint with Exhibits
2Exhibit A (Letter from DOI)
Exhibit B (letter from Gov. Snyder to Chairman Eitrem)
Exhibit C (Sault Tribe Submission for Mandatory Fee-to-Trust Acquisition)
Exhibit D (Same, for the Sibley Parcel)
Exhibit E (Sault Tribe approval of development agreement with Lansing, MI)
Exhibit F (Comprehensive Development Agreement between Sault Tribe and Lansing)
Previous coverage of the Lansing casino case here.
Updated Materials in Michigan v. Sault Tribe — State Seeks to Sue Tribal Officials
Here are the materials in State of Michigan v. Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians (W.D. Mich.):
55 State Response to Motion to Dismiss
58 Soo Tribe Response to Motion for Relief
63 DCT Order to Adjourn and Reschedule Oral Argument
Sixth Circuit materials are 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
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.