Section 1983 – Page 4

Sheriff’s Deputy David Olson shot and killed Christopher Capps (Capps).
Capps’s parents, Jerry and Jaylene Capps, sued Deputy Olson for using excessive
force against their son in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Deputy Olson alleges Capps
was charging towards him with a weapon at the time of the shooting. Capps’s parents allege Deputy Olson shot Capps in the back when Capps was unarmed. Deputy
Olson moved for summary judgment based on qualified immunity. The district court1
denied Deputy Olson’s motion, holding that outstanding questions of fact precluded
a grant of qualified immunity. For the reasons stated below, we affirm.

Otoe-Missouria Tribal Chairman Brings Civil Rights Action against Connecticut Dept. of Banking

March 10, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the complaint in Shotton v. Pitkin (W.D. Okla.):

1 Complaint

An excerpt:

Plaintiff brings this action as a result of unlawful enforcement actions taken by Defendants against Plaintiff and Defendants’ entry of a state administrative order imposing a civil penalty of $700,000 against Plaintiff in his individual capacity and unlawfully restraining his conduct without due process of law and in violation of his individual right to immunity as a tribal official.

Our post on a related suit in Connecticut Superior Court action is here.

Federal Court Challenge to Onondaga Nation ICW Jurisdiction Defeated

February 18, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Pitre v. Shenandoah (N.D. N.Y):

12-5 Onondaga Nation Motion to Dismiss

20-5 Onondaga County Motion to Dismiss

34-2 Oswego County Motion to Dismiss

45 DCT Order

Federal Civil Rights Claim Brought by Indian-Owned Construction Contractor May Proceed

January 9, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in Parker Excavating Inc. v. Lafarge West (D. Colo.):

22 Defendants Motion to Dismiss

30 PEI Response

39 Defendants Reply

62 DCT Order

Section 1983 Complaint against Foxwoods over in Mini-Baccharat “Edge Sorting” (UPDATED 5-25-16)

August 4, 2014May 25, 2016Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here are the materials so far in Sun v. Mashantucket Pequot Gaming Enterprise (D. Conn.):

1 Complaint

1-2 Exhibit

Here is an excerpt from the complaint:

On or about December 24, 2011, plaintiff Cheung Yin Sun, along with two other playing partners, plaintiffs Long Mei Fang and Zong Yang Lei, deposited approximately $1.6 million dollars in shared front money with defendant Foxwoods Resorts Casino in order to play Mini-Baccarat (Exhibit A, 1). Plaintiffs won approximately $1.148 million in chips that evening while playing Mini-Baccarat on the graveyard shift. Plaintiffs won the $1.148 million honestly by using an advantage play strategy known as “edge sorting,” which will be described in more detail below. However defendants Foxwoods and Foxwoods Management refused to redeem the chips/winnings because they accused plaintiffs of cheating.

Updated materials:

22 Connecticut Motion to Dismiss

31-1 Pequot Motion to Dismiss

Docket entry 37:

ORDER granting 31 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction; granting 20 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. The Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (doc. no. [22] ) and Motion to Dismiss (doc. no. 31 ) are both granted absent objection because the plaintiffs have failed to take the necessary steps to establish the court’s personal jurisdiction as to any of the defendants. Accordingly the case is dismissed. SO ORDERED by Judge Janet C. Hall on 5/29/2015. (Lewis, D) (Entered: 06/01/2015)