Third Circuit Briefs in United States v. Neff [third-party use of tribal immunity defense; “rent-a-tribe”]

Here are the materials in United States v. Neff:

Hallinan Appellant Brief

Neff Appellant Brief

US Answer Brief

Neff Reply

Hallinan Reply

FTC Wins Another Motion in Suit against Various Tribal Payday Lenders

Here are the updated materials in Federal Trade Commission v. AMG (D. Nev.):

444 MJ Report

448 Little Axe Objection

449 AMG et al Objection

451 FTC Response

559 DCT Order Adopting MJ Report

Prior post in this part of the litigation is here. The post related to the partial settlement is here. Other posts are here and here.

Federal Trade Commission Partially Settles Suit against Indian Country Payday Lenders

The case is Federal Trade Commission v. AMG Services (D. Nev.). Here are the most recent materials from the FTC website:

News coverage here.

Briefs here:

FTC Motion for Partial Summary J

AMG Response

Brady Response

Tucker Defendants Response

FTC Reply


Update in FTC v. Tribal Payday Lenders: Magistrate Denies Motion to Quash Fed. Subpoenas

Here are the materials in Federal Trade Commission v. AMG (D. Nev.):

AMG Motion to Dismiss

AMG 1st Motion to Quash

AMG 2d Motion to Quash

Magistrate Order Denying Motion for Protective Order

Prior materials here and here.

Update in Federal Trade Commission Suit against Tribal Payday Lenders et al.

Here are additional pleadings in Federal Trade Commission v. AMG Services, Inc. (D. Nev.):

Scott Tucker & AMG Response

Robert Campbell Response

Part 269 Response

Muir Law Firm Response

Little Axe Response

Don Brady Response

Scott Tucker & AMG Motion to Dismiss

Little Axe Motion to Dismiss

Joint Motion to Dismiss

The “responses” are responses to the FTC’s motion for a preliminary injunction. That motion and the complaint are here and here.

News coverage via Pechanga here.

More Bad Press on Tribal Payday Lending Companies

Here, via Indianz.

Two points on payday lenders that should be apparent by now:

1. Read the Nebraska Supreme Court decision in StoreVisions v. Omaha Tribe, where the court held that tribal immunity was waived where the tribal chair and vice chair signed a waiver document (without constitutional authority to waive immunity) in the presence of other council members, and which the court held the presence of the other council members was sufficient to waive tribal immunity. Courts will find a way to find a waiver.

2. Read David Fredericks’ rendition (pp.217-18) of the oral argument before the U.S. Supreme Court in C&L Enters. v. Citizen Potawatomi, where the Court directly asked the CPN attorney about the way tribes view immunity, and the deeply off-put reaction from the Court by the answer. In fact, here is that exchange (well worth the read):

Continue reading

Modoc Business Entity Petition for Review in California Supreme Court re: Immunity Issue

Here is the petition in MTE Financial Services v. Alameda County Superior Court:

MTE Financial Services v Superior Court Petition for Review