Here are the materials so far in Evans Energy Partners LLC v. Seminole Tribe of Florida Inc. (M.D. Fla.):
1-3 Tribal Court Final Judgment
Update (9/20/21):
tribal sovereign immunity
North Dakota SCT Confirms Tribal Immunity Cloaks Tribal Business
Here are the materials in State of North Dakota by and through Workforce Safety and Insurance v. Cherokee Services Corp.:
Federal Court Allows Some Tobacco Business Claims in Dispute between Sac and Fox, Seneca, and Susanville Rancheria Companies
Here are the materials so far in Allegheny Capital Enterprises LLC v. Cox (W.D. N.Y.):
An excerpt:
This is a diversity action commenced by a corporate entity affiliated with the Sac and Fox of Oklahoma Tribe (doing business in the Seneca Nation in New York) and a partnership doing business in the Seneca Nation. They claim that Defendants, officers of affiliated corporations of the Susanville Indian Rancheria (a Native tribe in California, also referred to as “SIR”), made misrepresentations to Plaintiffs that led to Plaintiffs entering into the tobacco manufacturing and distribution contracts with one of the affiliated corporations. Defendants represented that they had the authority to waive tribal sovereign immunity for the affiliate corporation and that the affiliate in fact waived that immunity. After an alleged breach of these contracts, Plaintiffs lodged claims against one of the affiliate corporations, but the corporation successfully asserted that it did not waive its tribal sovereign immunity. Plaintiffs then commenced this action against the officers; they did not name the corporation as a Defendant.
Before this Court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 17) the Amended Complaint on sovereign immunity, jurisdictional, and pleading grounds. For the reasons stated herein, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is granted in part (dismissing claims against Defendants Stacy Dixon and Jolene Robles for lack of personal jurisdiction), denied in part (denying other grounds asserted). After resolution of this motion, Plaintiffs retain claims against Defendant Gretchen Cox.
Wakpamni Lake Corp. Seeks Relief from Default Judgment in TED Bonds Fraud Case
Here is the pleading from Michelin Retirement Plan v. Dilworth Paxon LLP (D.S.C.):
608-15 Victim Impact Statement
An excerpt from the motion:
In or about the fall of 2017, a man named Quattlebaum contacted WLCC and Wakpamni Lake Community President Lone Hill on three separate occasions. (Lone Hill Decl. ¶ 27; see also Raynes Decl. ¶ 16.) President Lone Hill understood that Mr. Quattlebaum was Judge Quattlebaum, then a United States District Judge for this Court.1 (Lone Hill Decl. ¶ 27; see also Raynes Decl. ¶ 16.) Mr. Quattlebaum asked President Lone Hill about the financial state of WLCC and Wakpamni Lake Community and about the subject matter of the lawsuit. (Lone Hill Decl. ¶ 27.) Based on the information received, Mr. Quattlebaum deduced that WLCC and the Wakpamni Lake Community were destitute. (Id.) President Lone Hill understood from her conversations with Mr. Quattlebaum that he understood and appreciated their innocent and impoverished position. President Lone Hill further understood and believed that Mr. Quattlebaum—as a judge of this Court—indicated to her that no further action was needed with respect to this case.
Prior post in this case here.
Connecticut SCT Briefs in Great Plains Lending LLC v. State of Connecticut Dept. of Banking
California COA Rejects Immovable Property Exception to Tribal Immunity
Here is the opinion in Self v. Cher-AE Heights Indian Community of the Trinidad Rancheria:
Briefs:
Federal Court Dismisses Remaining Claims of Wapato Heritage in Colville Leasing Matter
Here are the materials in Grondal v. United States (E.D. Wash.):
275 Colville Motion to Dismiss
571 Colville Supplemental Brief re 275
572 Wapato Motion for Partial Summary J
588 Colville Reply in Support of 275
605 US Reply in Support of 570
Prior post here.
Materials in Suit against Lac Courte Oreilles Ojibwe Internet Lending Biz
Here are the materials in Easley v. Hummingbird Funds (S.D. Ala.):
Eleventh Circuit briefs:
Federal Court Dismisses Tort Claim Against Alabama-Coushatta Tribe
Here are the materials in Jones v. Alabama-Coushatta Tribe (E.D. Tex.):
30 Supplemental Motion to Dismiss
An excerpt:
Jones’s objections to the Reports do not raise any new arguments to support his claim that his premises liability claim is not barred by sovereign immunity. He instead continues to argue that this court should follow Wilkes v. PCI Gaming Authority, 287 So.3d 330, and hold that the Tribe’s sovereign immunity is waived in the interests of justice. But as discussed in the first Report, the only court to cite Wilkes has declined to follow it. See Oertwich v. Traditional Vill. of Togiak, 413 F. Supp. 3d 963, 968 (D. Alaska 2019). The court agrees with the magistrate judge that “Wilkes, an Alabama Supreme Court decision that has never been cited by any circuit court, is not enough for this court to override both Fifth Circuit case law dismissing damages claims based on tribal sovereign immunity or the case law from other circuits upholding sovereign immunity for claims sounding in tort.” (Doc. #25, at 6). Thus, this claim must be dismissed.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.