Here is the complaint:
Via Pechanga.
Here are those materials:
Miccosukee Discovery Memorandum
US Response to Miccosukee Discovery Motion
DCT Order on Miccosukee Motion for Discovery
Our earlier post on this case is here.
Here are the materials in Everglades Ecolodge at Big Cypress v. Seminole Tribe of Florida (S.D. Fla.):
As reported by Pechanga. Here are the materials in Miccosukee Tribe v. United States (S.D. Fla.):
DCT Order Denying Miccosukee Petition to Quash
Here is the opinion and selected materials from Furry v. Miccosukee Tribe (S.D. Fla.):
DCT Order Dismissing Furry Complaint
Miccosukee Motion to Dismiss Furry Complaint
Furry Response to Motion to Dismiss
Miccosukee Response to Motion for Discovery on Grounds for Sovereign Immunity
Here are the materials in this stage of a long saga — Hollywood Mobile Estates v. Cypress (S.D. Fla.):
DCT Order Granting Hollywood Mobile Estates Motion
Here is the complaint in South Florida Entertainment Inc. v. Seminole Tribe of Florida (S.D. Fla.):
Here’s the first paragraph:
1. This action, in material part, seeks declaratory relief wherein SFLE and individual Plaintiffs seek to have this Court declare that the Tribe has violated the Indian Civil Rights Act, 25 U.S.C. § § 1301 and 1302 (the “ICRA”) and to order further necessary and proper relief in favor of SFLE pursuant to 28 US.C. §2202. Among other things, SFLE believes and contends that the Tribe is incapable of meeting its quasi-Constitutional obligation to provide due process of law under the ICRA due to its admitted failure to create and maintain a tribal court system or any other legitimate forum for ensuring compliance with the ICRA and the Constitutional-like protections it is intended to grant to members and non-Tribal members, alike. SFLE also seeks a declaration concerning whether the Tribe’s administration of the issuance of Tribal Liquor Licenses comports with or violates federal law, namely 18 U.S.C. §§1154, 1156 and 1161. SFLE also seeks a judicial declaration that the Tribe has contractually waived sovereign immunity with respect to disputes involving the Tribe, the Seminole Hard Rock Hotel and Casino which it operates and owns, SPR, and its commercial tenants and subtenants, like SFLE as well as the individual Plaintiffs. Moreover, each Plaintiff alleges that the Tribe solely controls SPR, as indicated in several pieces of correspondence with Plaintiffs. Proof of such control is reflected in Plaintiff’s Composite Exhibit “C” where the Defendant Tribe specifically alleges that it does business as SPR. The individual’s Plaintiffs, PENDLETON and PRIOLO, also allege damages for various tort claims against both Defendants, as stated within the various Counts herein below.
You must be logged in to post a comment.