Federal Court Refuses to Vacate Sentence of Man Convicted of Bribing Ho-Chunk Nation Leaders

Here are the materials in Whiteagle v. United States (W.D. Wis.):

1-motion-to-vacate-sentence

4-opposition

6-reply

11-dct-order

An excerpt:

In August 2012, after an 8-day trial, a jury found petitioner Timothy Whiteagle guilty of twelve counts relating to bribing and conspiring to bribe a Ho-Chunk Nation legislator to secure favorable treatment for three different vendors wishing to do business with the Nation. United States v. Whiteagle, Case No. 11-cr-65-wmc-1. On October 24, 2012, this court sentenced him to serve 120 months in prison, to be followed by 3 years of supervised release. Petitioner filed and lost motions for acquittal, a new trial, resentencing, and a direct appeal. He has now filed a motion for post-conviction relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, arguing that his conviction should be vacated for numerous reasons. Because none of petitioner’s challenges support overturning his conviction, the court will deny the motion.

Federal Court Holds Tribes Immune from Fair Credit Reporting Act Claims

Here are the materials in Meyers v. Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin (W.D. Wis.):

14 Oneida Motion to Dismiss

19 Meyer Opposition

20 Oneida Reply

23 DCT Order

Federal Court Enjoins Ho-Chunk Poker as a Class III Game

Here are the materials in State of Wisconsin v. Ho-Chunk Nation (W.D. Wis.):

25 HCN Brief

22 Wisconsin Brief

29 Wisconsin Response Brief

32 Ho-Chunk Response Brief

35 DCT Order

An excerpt:

The state of Wisconsin has brought this case to enjoin defendant Ho–Chunk Nation from offering electronic poker at Ho–Chunk Gaming Madison (formerly DeJope), the Ho–Chunk Nation’s gaming facility in Madison, Wisconsin. The question raised in the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment is whether Ho–Chunk Nation’s poker game violates a compact with the state. The answer to that question turns on whether electronic poker qualifies as a “class II” or “class III” game under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Class III games are prohibited by the compact except under certain conditions not present in this case, but class II games are permitted. Because I conclude that Ho–Chunk Nation’s electronic poker game is a class III game, I am granting the state’s motion for summary judgment and denying Ho–Chunk Nation’s motion.

Bond Reformation/Tribal Court Jurisdiction Matter: Stifel v. LCO

Here are the materials so far in Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Incorporated v. Lac Courte Oreilles Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians of Wisconsin (W.D. Wis.):

1 Stifel Complaint

10 LCO Motion to Dismiss or Stay

13 LCO Tribal Court Motion to Dismiss or Stay

14 Stifel Response

18 LCO Tribal Court Reply

19 LCO Reply

25 Stifel Motion for PI

29 Joint Stipulation re Stay of Tribal Court Proceedings

30 DCT Order Allowing Dismissal of Prior Motions wo Prejudice

38 Stifel Motion for Summary J

44 LCO Opposition

49 Stifel Reply

76 DCT Order

An excerpt:

Plaintiff Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Inc. (“Stifel”) seeks equitable reformation of its Bond Purchase Agreement with defendant Lac Courte Oreilles Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians of Wisconsin (the “Band”), as well as a declaratory judgment that the Band may not proceed to sue Stifel in a currently-pending action in Lac Courte Oreilles Tribal Court. Before the court now is plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on both claims. (Dkt.# 37.) Based on the undisputed facts of record, the court holds that Stifel is entitled to reformation of the Bond Purchase Agreement, but also concludes that the Band may proceed with its pending claims against Stifel in Lac Courte Oreilles Tribal Court. Although Stifel has had ample opportunity to do so already, because the Band did not affirmatively move for summary judgment, the court will give Stifel yet another opportunity to proffer additional evidence, if any, that the forum selection clause in the Bond Purchase Agreement clearly precludes the Band from proceeding in Tribal Court.

SCOTUS Denies Village of Hobart v. Oneida Indian Nation

Order list here.

Cert petition here. Cert opp briefs here.

Lower court materials here.

Federal Court Enforces EEOC Subpoena in ADEA Matter against Forest County Potawatomi

Here are the materials in EEOC v. Forest County Potawatomi Community (W.D. Wis.):

3 EEOC Brief

7 Forest County Potawatomi Response

10 EEOC Reply

13 DCT Order Enforcing Subpoena

Cert Opposition Briefs in Village of Hobart v. Wisconsin Oneida

Here:

US Opposition Brief

Tribe Opposition Brief

Petition is here.

Lower court materials here.

Village of Hobart v. Oneida Tribe of Wisconsin Cert Petition

Here:

Hobart Cert Petition

Questions presented:

1) Whether Congress’ waiver of the federal government’s sovereign immunity, under § 313(a) of the CWA, for enforcement of local stormwater management ordinances, for “any property” over which it has “jurisdiction,” applies to land taken into trust pursuant to 25 U.S.C. § 465.
2) Whether lands acquired by an Indian tribe pursuant to 25 U.S.C. § 465, within its former reservation boundaries are, removed from state jurisdiction because, as the Seventh Circuit ruled, they are reclassified as “Indian Country.”

Lower court materials here.