District Court Dismisses Casino Developer’s Complaint Against Dickinson Wright

Here are the materials and order in the matter of MCZ Development Corp. et. al. v. Dickinson Wright PLLC et. al.:

Doc. 37- Memorandum in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
Doc. 38- Plaintiffs’ Response in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
Doc. 39- Reply in Further Support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
Doc. 42- Memorandum Opinion and Order

Complaint and news coverage previously posted here.

Kialegee Casino Developers sued Dickinson Wright PLLC in Illinois District Court for malpractice in 2013.  In 2012, The Northern District of Oklahoma issued a preliminary injunction against Plaintiffs to stop a casino being placed 70 miles from the Tribe’s headquarters and the National Indian Gaming Commission issued a letter stating the Tribe didn’t have jurisdiction on the property.  The Plaintiffs alleged the law firm misrepresented potential opposition to their casino.

The Illinois court ruled the NIGC claim was premature since its letter didn’t represent a final agency decision and also dismissed the complaint with prejudice because Plaintiffs prevailed when the 10th Circuit reversed the injunction and ordered Oklahoma’s case dismissed.

Oklahoma v. Hobia Cert Stage Briefing Complete

Here:

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari

Hobia Cert Opp

Oklahoma Reply

Lower court materials here.

Hobia Cert Opposition Brief

Here:

Hobia Cert Opp

Cert petition here.

Oklahoma v. Hobia Cert Petition

Here:

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari (as filed)

Question presented:

Does Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community, 134 S.Ct. 2024 (2014), require the dismissal of a State’s suit to prevent tribal officers from conducting gaming that would be unlawful under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act and a state-tribal compact when

• the suit for declaratory and injunctive relief has been brought against tribal officials – not the tribe;
• the gaming will occur in Indian country, on the land of another tribe; and

• the state-tribal compact’s arbitration provision does not require arbitration before filing suit?

Lower court materials here.

Tenth Circuit Issues Amended Opinion in Oklahoma v. Hobia

Here. Like its earlier decision, today’s amended opinion concludes that the district court erroneously granted the State’s request for a preliminary injunction and held that the State’s complaint, which alleged class III gaming activities on non-Indian lands, failed to state a claim under IGRA.

The Tenth Circuit also reiterated that arbitration provisions in the state’s gaming compact effectively barred Oklahoma from suing tribal officials in federal court for purported violations of the compact. The court remanded the matter to the Northern District of Oklahoma with instructions to vacate the preliminary injunction and to dismiss Oklahoma’s complaint with prejudice.

Also, the court denied the petition for en banc review.

Panel materials are here.

Tenth Circuit Reverses Oklahoma v. Hobia Relying on Bay Mills

Here is the opinion:

CA10 Opinion

Lower court supplemental briefs here.

Briefs are here.

Lower court materials here.

Tenth Circuit Supplemental Briefs in Oklahoma v. Hobia re: Bay Mills Decision

Here:

Oklahoma Supplemental Brief re Bay Mills

Tribal Supplemental Brief re Bay Mills

The Tenth Circuit previously abated this matter pending the outcome in Michigan v. Bay Mills.

Kialegee Casino Developer Sues Dickinson Wright for Malpractice over Broken Arrow Casino

Here is the complaint in MCZ Development Corp. v. Dickinson Wright PLLC (N.D. Ill.):

Complaint

News coverage here.

Tenth Circuit Abates Oklahoma v. Hobia until Supreme Court Decides Michigan v. Bay Mills — Updated

Here:

2013.09.05 – Order Abating

UPDATE (9/11/13) — Supplemental Briefs are here:

Kialegee Supplemental Brief

Oklahoma Supplemental Brief

Briefs are here.

Lower court materials here.

Michigan Files Amicus Brief in State of Oklahoma v. Hobia

Here:

State of Michigan Amicus Brief

The other opening briefs are here.