Federal Court Dismisses ICRA Takings Claim against Eastern Band Cherokee

Here are the materials in Ledford v. Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians (W.D. N.C.):

14 Amended Complaint

17 Motion to Dismiss

20 Response

21 Reply

23 DCT Order

Federal Court Dismisses FLSA Claim against EBCI Casino

Here are the materials in Clark v. Harrah’s NC Casino Company, LLC (W.D. N.C.):

1 Complaint

18-1 Motion to Dismiss

29 Amended Complaint

34-1 Motion to Dismiss

39 Response

43 Reply

45 Individual Defendant MTD

51 Response

52 Reply

53 Magistrate Report

54 Defendants Limited Objections

55 Plaintiff Objections

56 Plaintiff Reply

57 Defendants Reply

58 DCt Order

Compensation-Based Class Action against Eastern Band Cherokee Casino Materials

Here are the materials so far in Clark v. Harrah’s NC Casino Company LLC (W.D. N.C.):

1 Complaint

34-1 Motion to Dismiss

39 Opposition

43 Reply

53 Magistrate Report

54 Defendants’ Limited Objections

55 Clark Objections

Prisoner Section 1983 Suit against Tribal Police and Judge Dismissed

Here is the order in Tramper v. Smith (W.D. N.C.):

2 DCT Order

An excerpt:

Plaintiff’s Complaint will be dismissed for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff purports to bring a civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the tribal prosecutor and the tribal judge who participated in Plaintiff’s criminal action in tribal court for the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians. Actions brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 must allege deprivation of constitutional rights under color of state law, as opposed to under color of tribal law. See R.J. Williams Co. v. Fort Belknap Hous. Auth., 719 F.2d 979, 982 (9th Cir. 1983). Here, Plaintiff does not allege that Defendants were acting under color of state law; indeed, Plaintiff’s claim appears to arise from his criminal conviction in tribal court pursuant to tribal law. Thus, for this reason alone, Plaintiff’s action is subject to dismissal.

In addition, to the extent that Plaintiff purports to sue Defendants in their official capacities, Defendants enjoy sovereign immunity from suit. “Indian tribes are neither states, nor part of the federal government, nor subdivisions of either.” N.L.R.B. v. Pueblo of San Juan, 276 F.3d 1186, 1192 (10th Cir. 2002) (en banc). Unless Congress authorizes the suit or sovereign immunity has been waived, Indian tribes, tribal entities, and persons acting on tribes’ behalf in an official capacity enjoy sovereign immunity against suit. Kiowa Tribe of Okla. v. Mfg. Techs., Inc., 523 U.S. 751, 754 (1998) (tribe); Allen v. Gold Country Casino, 464 F.3d 1044, 1046 (9th Cir. 2006) (tribal entity), Hardin v. White Mountain Apache Tribe, 779 F.2d 476, 479-80 (9th Cir.1985) (tribal officials).

 

Federal Court Stays Contract Breach Claim Pending Tribal Court Proceedings

Here are the materials in Lexington Insurance Co. v. Data Aire (W.D. N.C.):

Consent Motion to Stay All Proceedings

Consent Motion to Stay Attorney Conference

DCT Order

State Court Complaint

Federal Court Slip and Fall Action against Eastern Band Cherokee Dismissed

Here is the opinion in Madewell v. Harrah’s (W.D. N.C.): DCT Order Dismissing Slip and Fall Claim

McCracken v. Easley — N.C. Court Says IGRA Doesn’t Allow State to Ban Video Poker

Here is the opinion in McCracken v. Easley — mccracken-v-easley (via Pechanga and TV):

Strange case. Without any discussion except one sentence, the court struck down a state law ban on video poker, a ban that excluded tribal gaming in accordance with a Class III compact. The sentence is: “IGRA does not permit a state to ban the possession and operation of video gaming machines elsewhere in the state while allowing their possession and operation on tribal lands.”

I’d like to see the briefs, but all I can say is … baffling. Of course IGRA allows exactly this kind of law. IGRA allows tribes to negotiate and execute Class III compacts with states that have not banned gaming outright. And even if the state bans all gaming post-Class III compact, the compact will continue until it expires.