Here is that order:
Southern District of Florida
Federal Court Remands Contract Breach Claim against Seminole Tribe to State Court
Here are the materials in Contour Spa at Hard Rock v. Seminole Tribe (S.D. Fla.):
DCT Order Remanding Case to Fla. Cir. Ct.
Seminole Tribe Motion to Dismiss
Contour Spa Response to Cypress Motion
Contour Spa Response to Tribe Motion
Of note, the court here appeared to assume that the so-called “Dry Creek lodge exception” could apply here, but found that the plaintiffs did not meet the requirements (one of which was essentially exhaustion of tribal forums). This is a potentially troubling development (that is, the spread of Dry Creek Lodge to areas outside of the Tenth Circuit).
Court Order in Miccosukee IRS Tax Summons Case
Here: DCT Order Partially Granting US Motion.
Original Miccosukee petition to quash here, and briefs here.
Briefing in Miccosukee Dispute with IRS re: Tribal Income Records
Here are the updated materials in :
The Miccosukee petition to quash is here.
Miccosukee Petition to Quash IRS Subpoena in Billy Cypress Investigation
Here: Miccosukee Petition to Quash IRS Summons.
The case is captioned Miccosukee Tribe v. United States (S.D. Fla.).
Update on Miccosukee Tribe’s Ongoing Everglades Case
Here are two recent orders in Miccosukee Tribe v. United States (S.D. Fla.), the upshot being that an equal protection claim against the federal government has survived a motion to dismiss:
Fake Indians Convicted in Southern Florida of Selling Tribal Memberships
Here is the magistrate report and recommendations detailing the indictments — US v Watson
An excerpt:
On August 27, 2008, the undersigned Magistrate Judge reviewed an Application and Affidavit for Search Warrant and, based on that review, signed a Search Warrant (DE 121-2) for the premises located at 7500 N.W. 73rd Avenue, Tamarac, Florida. The Application and Affidavit for Search Warrant (DE 121-2) describes in considerable detail Defendant’s alleged criminal activity, as well as the affiant’s grounds for believing that an enumerated list of 13 items evidencing that activity could be found at the search premises.
The Affidavit asserts that Universal Service Dedicated to God, Inc. (“USDG”) was incorporated in Florida in 1996 and that since USDG’s incorporation, Defendant has been listed as its President. Id. at P 4 (DE 121-2). Law enforcement investigation revealed that from August 2005, Defendant and employees of USDG sold memberships in the Pembina Nation Little Shell Indian Tribe (“the Tribe”) by falsely representing to their clients, who were illegal aliens, that they would become United States citizens through their membership in the tribe and thereby resolve their immigration problems. Id. at P 5 (DE 121-2). Charging clients $ 1,500 per individual and $ 2,000 per couple, Defendant and the USDG employees completed applications for membership into the Tribe; they then issued identification documents, fraudulently stating that the applicants were members of the Tribe. Id. at PP 6, 7 (DE 121-2).
Eleventh Circuit Denies Stay in Miccosukee v. South Florida Management District
Talk about complicated. There are two independent lawsuits captioned Miccosukee Tribe v. South Florida Water Management District. They are the so-called “S-2” case and the “S-9” case. Both involve the moving of dirty water around the Everglades, just different pipes or canals or whatever.
S-9 went to the Supreme Court a few years back (opinion). S-2 went to trial in 2006. It’s on appeal before the CA11. The S-9 district court proceedings are stayed pending that appeal. The Tribe appealed that stay order and now the Eleventh Circuit rejects the appeal — opinion.
So we’ll wait to see how the CA11 decides the S-2 case.
Miccosukee Everglades Challenged Dismissed on Standing Grounds
Serrano v. US (S.D. Fla.) — Dismissal of FTCA Claim Against US/Tribal Employee
This case appears to be about a fundamental misunderstanding of how the Federal Tort Claims Act applies to tribal employees, or not. Serrano argued that any tribal employee working for a tribe with a self-determination contract was covered. Not so.
Turtle Talk 