Here:
petition-for-a-writ-of-certiorari.pdf
Question presented:
Whether an Indian tribe’s governing body can be stripped of its sovereign immunity from suit for actions taken by its members in their official capacities, as long as a plaintiff merely names the members individually and those officials will be bound by any judgment entered.
Lower court materials here.
Here are the materials in JW Gaming Development LLC v. James (N.D. Cal.):
129 Tribal Motion for Summary J
Prior posts here.
Here is the unpublished opinion in JW Gaming Development LLC v. James.
Materials here.
Here are the materials so far in Jones v. Wildcat (E.D. Pa.):
2019.06.07-docket-1-complaint-with-exhibits.pdf
2019.08.30-docket-9-wildcat-mtd.pdf
Here:
petitionforwritofcertiorari-3.pdf
Question presented:
Where an arbitration agreement contains a separate “delegation provision” that reserves for an arbitrator the authority to decide any disputes concerning arbitrability, does Section 2 of the Federal Arbitration Act require a court to decide any challenge to that provision’s validity before the court may proceed to address whether the parties’ underlying dispute is arbitrable?
Lower court materials here.
Update:
BIO: BriefInOpposition
Here is the unpublished opinion in In re Pinoville Pomo Nation [Pinoville Gaming Authority v. United States District Court].
Here are the briefs:
The appeal docs are here.
Here is the opinion:
From the court syllabus:
Plaintiffs Jessica Gingras and Angela C. Given borrowed money from Plain Green, LLC, an online lending operation owned by the Chippewa Cree Tribe of the Rocky Boy’s Indian Reservation in Montana. The terms of their loan agreements provide for interest rates well in excess of caps imposed by Vermont law. Gingras and Given sued, alleging violations of Vermont and federal law. They seek an injunction against tribal officers in charge of Plain Green and an award of money damages against other Defendants.
Some Defendants moved to dismiss, arguing that tribal sovereign immunity barred the suit. All Defendants moved to compel arbitration under the terms of the agreements. The district court (Geoffrey W. Crawford, Judge) denied both motions. We hold that tribal sovereign immunity does not bar this suit because Plaintiffs may sue tribal officers under a theory analogous to Ex parte Young for prospective, injunctive relief based on violations of state and substantive federal law occurring off of tribal lands. We further hold that the arbitration clauses of the loan agreements are unenforceable and unconscionable.
Briefs and link to lower court materials here.
