Currently pending in district court is a motion for summary judgment by the Pauma Band in their long-running dispute with the State of California over revenue sharing and their compact terms.
Here are the most recent materials:
Pauma Band Motion for Summary J
This case is on remand from the Ninth Circuit (materials here).
Here is that unpublished order.
An excerpt:
This case is remanded to the district court for reconsideration of all four ofthe Winter factors (see Winter v. Natural Res. Def. Council, – U.S. –, 129 S.Ct.365, 374 (2008)), and to re-analyze them in light of our recent decisions inAlliance for Wild Rockies v. Cottrell, 09-35756, 2010 WL 3665149 (9th Cir. July28, 2010) (amended Sept. 22, 2010) (articulating a post-Winter “sliding-scale”test), and Cachil Dehe Band of Wintun Indians of the Colusa Indian Cmty. v.California, No. 09-16942, 2010 WL 3274490 (9th Cir. Aug. 20, 2010) (altering theEastern District Court of California’s interpretation of the IGRA Compact formulafor determining the total number of Class III gaming licenses at issue). If uponreconsideration the district court determines injunctive relief is warranted, it mustjustify any alteration of the status quo. See Tanner Motor Livery, Ltd. v. Avis, Inc.,316 F.2d 804 (9th Cir. 1963).
Turtle Talk 