Federal Court Dismisses Slip and Fall Suit against Casino for Failure to Exhaust Tribal Remedies

Here are the materials in Sullivan v. Harrah’s Operating Company (D.S.C.):

28-1-motion-to-dismiss

34-dct-order

Federal Court Denies Rule 11 Sanctions Motion against Counsel for United Indian Health Services

Here are the materials in United Indian Health Services v. Su (E.D. Cal.):

29-dct-order-dismissing-suit

31-1-motion-for-sanctions

32-opposition

33-reply

35-dct-order-denying-sanctions

US Seeks Reversal in Lewis v. Clarke (Different Theory than Petitioners)

Here is that brief:

SG Brief

Here is another amicus brief supporting petitioner:

Conn. Trial Lawyers Assn. Amicus Brief

The background materials are here.

Montana SCT Affirms Immunity for Tribal Police Officer and CSKT

Here are the materials in Crawford v. Couture:

Montana SCT Opinion

Appellant Brief

Appellee Brief

Reply Brief

Fletcher Preview of Lewis v. Clarke

Here is “Supreme Court case could expose Indian tribes to new legal risks” at The Conversation.

Excerpt:

One would be tempted to think this is a case about fairness, about guaranteeing a forum for non-Indians to sue tribal employees who might be cloaked in a tribe’s immunity from the suit. In my opinion, fairness to the Lewis couple, however, comes at the expense of fairness to the tribe.

Recall that the tribe does provide a forum to resolve personal injury claims against it in tribal court, but with a one year limitations period. Under that law, the Mohegan tribal court has confirmed awards against tribal police officers; indeed, the tribe likely has settled thousands of claims over the years.

I have long argued that Indian tribes should provide an adequate forum to address the negligent actions of their employees. The Mohegan tribe has done so here by establishing a tribal court and a legal process for resolving personal injury claims. In fact, Mohegan was one of the earliest tribes to start doing so, way back in the 1990s. But personal injury lawyers have complained about Mohegan law because it bars punitive damages and other doctrines that can balloon judgment awards.

***

Background materials on the case are here.

Tribal Lender Immune from Telephone Consumer Protection Act Suit

Here are the materials in Finn v. Great Plains Lending LLC (W.D. Okla.):

15 Motion to Dismiss

16 Response

18 Reply

DCT Order

Eleventh Circuit Holds ADEA Does Not Abrogate Tribal Immunity

Here is the opinion in Williams v. Poarch Band of Creek Indians.

Briefs:

Williams Brief

Poarch Band Brief

Reply

Lower court materials here.

Florida Court Affirms Immunity of Tribally-Owned LLC

Here is the opinion in Monahan v. Great Plains Lending, LLC (Fla. Cir. Ct.):

ca15-0449_order_granting_defendant_great_plains_lending_

 

Federal Court Holds Federal Trade Commission Act Doesn’t Abrogate Tribal Immunity

Here are the materials in Federal Trade Commission v. CWB Services LLC (W.D. Mo.):

231-turnover-motion

256-wyandotte-nation-response

257-wyandotte-nation-brief

292-reply

423-dct-order

Federal Bankruptcy Court Holds Sault Tribe Didn’t Waive Immunity

Earlier, the federal district court had held the federal bankruptcy act doesn’t abrogate tribal sovereign immunity.

Here are the materials in In re Greektown Holdings LLC (E.D. Mich. Bkrcy.):

649-1 Motion to Dismiss

668-buchwald-response

679-reply

728-order