IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA
|
|
- Florence Marsh
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Michael J. Walleri (ABA # ) GAZEWOOD & WEINER, PC th Ave., Suite 200 Fairbanks, AK tel: (907) fax: (907) Attorneys for Defendant Newtok Village IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA ALASKA LOGISTICS, LLC vs. - Petitioners, NEWTOK VILLAGE, d/b/a NEWTOK VILLAGE COUNCIL and GOLDSTREAM ENGINEERING, INC. - Defendants. CASE NO. 3:18-cv (SEG) MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS (Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1)) Introduction. This is a motion to dismiss Alaska Logistics' claims against Newtok Village, (Tribe) because the claims are barred by the Tribe's sovereign immunity. Alaska Logistics actions in this case amount to a classic and transparent bait-and-switch, in which Alaska Logistics bid to provide freight services to Mertarvik at specified rates using specified measurements and attempted to changed the rates and measurements after the Tribe loaded its freight on Alaska Logistic's barge. The Tribe is asserting its tribal sovereign immunity to quickly resolve this frivolous lawsuit. Memo: Dismiss Page 1 of 15 Case 3:18-cv SLG Document 19 Filed 07/06/18 Page 1 of 15
2 I. BACKGROUND A. General. Newtok, Alaska is a Yupik Eskimo village located on the Bering Sea, in the Wade Hampton Census Area of Western Alaska, approximately 100 miles west of Bethel, Alaska. 1 The the Tribe is acknowledged by the Secretary of the Interior as a Federally Recognized Tribal Entity. 2 Newtok's Tribal Status is undisputed in these proceedings. 3 The Newtok Village Council is the governing body of the Tribe. 4 Between 1989 and 2006, Newtok has been included in six (6) federal disaster declarations as a result of storms, flooding, coastal/riverbank erosion and thermal degradation (thawing permafrost). 5 The Corps of Engineers has projected with a substantial degree of certainty that the village site will suffer future damage and destruction of homes and public facilities, ending in total/functional destruction of the village site in the near term. 6 As a result, the the Tribe is relocating to Mertarvik, a more secure location on Nelson Island, nine (9) miles from the current village site across the Ninglick River. 7 As part of the the Tribe relocation effort, the the Tribe initiated the Mertarvik Roads Project, to develop road infrastructure at the Mertarvik site. 8 The the Tribe engaged Goldstream 1 See Alaska Division of Community and Regional Affairs, Community Database Online, Newtok, (last visited July 5, 2018). 2 See Indian Entities Recognized and Eligible To Receive Services From the United State Bureau of Indian Affairs, 81 FR 5019 (January 29, 2016); See Newtok Village v Patrick, Case No. 4:15-cv RRB 3 See Complaint, para 2, 4 See Newtok Traditional Council v. Acting Alaska Regional Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior Board of Indian Appeals, 61 IBIA 167 (Aug. 6, 2015). 5 See DR1571-AK, DR1618-AK, DR4162-AK, DR0832-AK, DR1426-AK, DR1657-AK. See also FEMA 0909-AK, FEMA located at 6 See generally ALASKA NATIVE VILLAGES, Limited Progress Has Been Made on Relocating Villages Threatened by Flooding and Erosion (GOA ; June 2009) located at 7 Id. 8 Plt. Ex. A attached to Complaint, p. 5 (Doc. 1-1) Memo: Dismiss Page 2 of 15 Case 3:18-cv SLG Document 19 Filed 07/06/18 Page 2 of 15
3 Engineering to manage the project. 9 B. Bid. On March 17, 2017 the Tribe issued an Invitation to Bid on barging construction fuel, equipment and supplies to Mertarvik for the Mertarvik Roads Project. 10 Alaska Logistics bid on the project offering 1) a lump sum of price of $267,899 for up to 880,000 lbs ( $ per lb.) of freight 2) Up to 25,000 gal of $4.99/ gal. 3) Extra $.25 a lb 4) demurrage at $3 a day. 11 The Tribe awarded the bid to Alaska Logistics. Alaska Logistics submitted a draft contract, which was not accepted nor signed by the Tribe, any of its officials nor agents, and was not signed by Alaska Logistics or Goldstream Engineering. 12 C. Pre-Payment and Acceptance of Freight. It is admitted in the pleadings that on or about April 14, 2017, the Tribe pre-paid the full bid amount to Alaska Logistics amounting to $316,899 which included the $267,899 lump sum amount, plus $49,900- fuel (for an estimated 10,000 gal of fuel). 13 Roughly one month later, (prior to May 15, 2017) Alaska Logistics accepted, received and loaded the freight bound for Mertarvik. 14 After accepting, receiving and loading the freight, and after the departure of the barge, Alaska 9 Id., See Complaint, para 7 10 Plt. Complaint at para. 7 See IFB at Ex.A, (Doc. 1-1) attached to Complaint. The bid was amended, Complaint, at para 15, et. seq. The bid addenda is Ex. B, to Complaint (Doc. 1-2) 11 Complaint, Ex. C (Doc. 1-3) 12 Id. The draft contract had many problems including proposing a contract between Alaska Logistics and Goldstream, not the Tribe, and 2) lacked any provisions respecting compensation. Other problems with the draft contract are discussed below. ; 13 Def. (Newtok) Answer at para 92 and Plt. Answer to Counterclaims, at para Plt. Complaint at para 36 Memo: Dismiss Page 3 of 15 Case 3:18-cv SLG Document 19 Filed 07/06/18 Page 3 of 15
4 Logistics advised Goldstream Engineering that Alaska Logistics wanted more money to ship the freight. 15 Alaska Logistics' pleadings admit that its request for additional compensation was based using freight measurements other than the rate for straight poundage stated in Alaska Logistic's bid (i.e. twenty-foot equivalent units aka TEU's). 16 D. Delivery of Freight. On or about June 1, 2017 Alaska Logistics delivered some of the freight, 17 however, there are factual disputes as to whether all the freight and fuel was delivered as promised. 18 II. GOVERNING LAW. A. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) Dismissal of a claim is appropriate under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 12(b) (1) when the court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over the claim. Federal subject-matter jurisdiction must exist at the time the action is commenced. Morongo Band of Mission Indians v. California Bd. of Equalization, 858 F.2d 1376, 1380 (9th Cir. 1988). To the extent that a tribe possesses immunity from suit, such (s)overeign immunity deprives a court of jurisdiction. United States v. Jones, 225 F.3d 468, 469 (4th Cir., 2000). Specifically, sovereign immunity deprives the court of subject matter jurisdiction in an action against an Indian Tribe. Alvarado v. Table Mt. Rancheria, 509 F.3d 1008, (9th Cir. 2007). 15 Id., see also Ex. D, (Doc. 1-4) attached to complaint. Cf. Alaska Logistic's bid offer contained at Exhibit C, (Doc. 1-3) attached to Complaint 16 Plt. Answer to Counterclaims, at para Plt. Complaint, para See Def. (Newtok) Answer para 97, 104, 105, 108. Cf. Plt Answer to Counterclaims at corresponding paragraphs. Memo: Dismiss Page 4 of 15 Case 3:18-cv SLG Document 19 Filed 07/06/18 Page 4 of 15
5 A Rule 12(b)(1) motion may either attack the sufficiency of the complaint to establish federal jurisdiction (a facial challenge) or allege a lack of jurisdiction that exists despite the formal sufficiency of the complaint (a factual challenge). White v. Lee, 227 F.3d 1214, 1242 (9th Cir. 2000). A facial attack asserts lack of federal jurisdiction based on the complaint alone, and the court must accept all allegations of fact in the complaint as true and construe them in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs. See Warren v. Fox Family Worldwide, Inc., 328 F.3d 1136, 1139 (9th Cir. 2003). By contrast, with a factual challenge, a court need not assume the truth of factual allegations but may hear additional evidence about jurisdiction and resolve factual disputes when necessary. See Roberts v. Corrothers, 812 F.2d 1173, 1177 (9 th Cir. 1987) If a defendant challenges jurisdiction by presenting evidence, then the party opposing the motion must present sufficient evidence to support the court's subject-matter jurisdiction. See Savage v. Glendale Union High School, Dist. No. 205, Maricopa County, 343 F.3d 1036, 1040 n. 2 (9th Cir. 2003). Defendant here advances both a facial and a factual challenge to the complaint under the doctrine of sovereign immunity. B. Tribal Sovereign Immunity- Generally Indian tribes have long been recognized as possessing common-law immunity from suit traditionally enjoyed by sovereign powers. Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S. 49, 58 (1978). As a matter of federal law, an Indian tribe is subject to suit only where Congress has authorized the suit or the tribe has waived its immunity. Kiowa Tribe of Okla. v. Mfg. Techs., Inc., 523 U.S. 751, 754 (1998). Stated otherwise, Suits against Indian tribes are... barred by sovereign immunity absent a clear waiver by the tribe or Memo: Dismiss Page 5 of 15 Case 3:18-cv SLG Document 19 Filed 07/06/18 Page 5 of 15
6 congressional abrogation. Oklahoma Tax Comm'n v. Citizen Band Potawatomi Indian Tribe, 498 U.S. 505, 509 (1991); Stock West Corp. v. Lujan, 982 F.2d 1389, 1398 (9th Cir. 1993). Tribes enjoy immunity from suits on contracts, whether those contracts involve governmental or commercial activities and whether they were made on or off a reservation. Kiowa, 523 U.S. at 760; See also Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Cmty. 572 U.S., 134 S.Ct. 2024, 2028 (2014). Moreover, a tribe's sovereign immunity extends both to tribal governing bodies and to tribal agencies which act as an arm of the tribe. Allen v. Gold Country Casino, 464 F.3d 1044, 1046 (9th Cir. 2006). As noted above, Courts have noted that tribal sovereign powers predate the establishment of the United States and are based on the tribes' status as autonomous political entities that retain certain natural rights related to self-governance. Ninigret Development Corp. v. Narragnasett Indian Wetuomuck Housing Authority, 207 F.3d 1, 29 (1st Cir. 2000), citing Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. (6 Pet.) 515, 559 (1832). In Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S. 49, 58 (1978), the Court, citing previous decisions, described tribal immunity as emanating from the common law immunity from suit traditionally enjoyed by sovereign powers. Because this common law immunity is an inherent attribute of sovereignty similar to the immunity of the United States, it shields tribes from suit absent an express waiver by the tribe. See Smith v. Salish Kootenai College, 434 F.3d 1127 (9th Cir. 2006). It is well-settled that a waiver of sovereign immunity "cannot be implied but must be unequivocally expressed." Santa Clara Pueblo, 436 U.S. at 58 & 60; United States v. Memo: Dismiss Page 6 of 15 Case 3:18-cv SLG Document 19 Filed 07/06/18 Page 6 of 15
7 Testan, 424 U.S. 392, 399, S.Ct. 948, 953, 47 L.Ed. 114 (1976); United States v. King, 395 U.S. 1, 4, 89 S.Ct. 1501, 1502, 23 L.Ed.2d 52 (1969). III. ANALYSIS Alaska Logistics admits that the Tribe is a federally recognized tribal entity, 19 to which it necessarily follows that the Tribe possesses immunity from suit based upon its tribal status. 20 Essentially, Alaska Logistics asserts a daisy-chain of implication: i.e. it seeks to imply Tribal consent to a waiver of sovereign immunity contained in an implied contact. Specifically, at paragraph 26 of its complaint, Alaska Logistics claims that the Tribe waived its immunity from suit, specifically alleging, NVC s agreement to the forum selection clause set forth in the Transportation Agreement constitutes a waiver of sovereign immunity to the extent NVC is entitled to invoke or is protected by such doctrine. 21 As noted above, tribal sovereign immunity comprehensively protects recognized American Indian tribes from suit absent explicit and unequivocal waiver or abrogation. Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S. 49, 59, 98 S.Ct. 1670, 56 L.Ed.2d 106 (1978). Implicit in Alaska Logistics' paragraph 26 allegation are the presumptions that the Tribe 1) was a party to Alaska Logistics' proposed Transportation Agreement, 2) agreed to the terms of the agreement, and 3) the terms included a consent to this suit. The proposed Transportation Agreement is not an explicit nor unequivocal waiver sovereign immunity, because none of these three (3) presumptions are correct. 19 Complaint para 2 20 Santa Clara Pueblo, 436 U.S. at 58 & Complaint para 26 Memo: Dismiss Page 7 of 15 Case 3:18-cv SLG Document 19 Filed 07/06/18 Page 7 of 15
8 A. The Tribe Was Not A Party To The Proposed Transportation Agreement. The proposed Transportation Agreement does not purport, by its terms, to be an agreement with the Tribe. 22 Rather, the introductory pre-amble of the agreement states that the agreement is between Alaska Logistics, as the Carrier, and Goldstream Engineering, as the Shipper. 23 If there was any ambiguity on this point, the signature block of the agreement proposes that the agreement be signed by Alaska Logistics, as the Carrier and Goldstream Engineering, as the Shipper. The agreement does not name the Tribe as a party to the agreement nor does the agreement anticipate the Tribe to be a signatory to the agreement. By its very terms, the agreement cannot be viewed as an agreement between Alaska Logistics and the Tribe and the agreement cannot be construed to grant any right or privilege to Alaska Logistics from the Tribe. More to the point, if the Tribe was never contemplated to be a party to the agreement, it is simply nonsensical to suggest the agreement constitutes an express and unequivocal waiver of the Tribe's immunities from suit as to claims arising under the agreement. B. The Tribe Did Not Agree To The Terms of the Agreement. Implicit in Alaska Logistic's paragraph 26 allegation is the assertion that the Tribe expressly and unequivocally agreed to waive the Tribe's immunity by expressly and unequivocally agreeing to Alaska Logistics' proposed Transportation Agreement. Of course, the argument rests upon an obvious fallacy: i.e.the Tribe never expressly nor unequivocally accepted the proposed Transportation Agreement upon which Alaska Logistics relies in support of its 22 Exhibit C attached to Plt's Complaint. 23 Id. Memo: Dismiss Page 8 of 15 Case 3:18-cv SLG Document 19 Filed 07/06/18 Page 8 of 15
9 claims. 24 Not only was the Tribe not a signatory party to the agreement, (see above), at no time did the tribe otherwise sign Alaska Logistics' proposed agreement. There is simply no legal authority to suggest that a Tribe expressly and unequivocally waives its immunity from suit when it declines to enter into an agreement which might be construed to waive such immunity. Recent Supreme Court precedence illustrates the requisite elements necessary to effectuate an express tribal waiver of immunity from suit and the relatively nuanced difference between finding a express and unequivocal waiver, as opposed to finding no waiver. In Kiowa the Court found no waiver of immunity from suit where the Tribe signed a promissory note agreeing to pay the seller $285,000 plus interest. 523 U.S. at The Court found that the signed note did not contain a waiver of immunity by the Tribe. 523 U.S., at 760 In reaching this holding the Court found that absent an express waiver contained in the signed memorialized agreement, no waiver could be implied. 25 In contrast, the Supreme Court in Citizen Band Potawatomi Indian Tribe v. C& L Enterprises, 532 U.S. 411 (2001), held that when a Tribe signs a contract with a clear arbitration provision and choice-of-laws clause which results in an agreement to arbitrate under state law, the Tribe has waived its sovereign immunity. 532 U.S., at 412. Alaska Logistics' assertion simply fails to approach the threshold of the nuanced distinctions illustrated in Kiowa and C& L Enterprises: i.e. a signed agreement. The critical threshold in both cases is that the Tribe signed agreements, and the question as to 24 See unsigned proposed Transportation Agreement- Exhibit C, attached to Plt. Complaint 25 Id. Memo: Dismiss Page 9 of 15 Case 3:18-cv SLG Document 19 Filed 07/06/18 Page 9 of 15
10 whether the agreements comprised a waiver was determined by the content of the agreements. In this case, the Court need not reach the questions presented by the content of the agreements because the Tribe never signed Alaska Logistics' proposed Transportation Agreement. To the extent that the proposed Transportation Agreement might be construed to waive the Tribe's immunity (which is disputed; see below) the Tribe's declination to sign the agreement renders Alaska Logistics' conclusion a non-sequitur. The Tribe did not consent to any waiver which might be contained in the agreement because the Tribe did not consent to the agreement itself. At best, Alaska Logistics seeks to imply a waiver of sovereign immunity based upon an unsigned implied agreement. Of course, tribal waivers of sovereign immunity may not be implied. Martinez, 436 U.S. at 60 (1978); Santa Clara Pueblo, 436 U.S. at 58; United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. 392, 399, S.Ct. 948, 953, 47 L.Ed. 114 (1976); United States v. King, 395 U.S. 1, 4, 89 S.Ct. 1501, 1502, 23 L.Ed.2d 52 (1969). Alaska Logistics' assertion is nothing more than a transparent attempt to imply a waiver of sovereign immunity, which is contrary to the black letter law that tribal waivers of sovereign immunity may not be implied Martinez, Martinez, supra; Santa Clara Pueblo, supra; Testan, supra; King, supra. Alaska Logistic's has not alleged an implied waiver based upon activities/actions of the Tribe. Such an allegation, if it were made, would be equally contrary to the prescription against implied waiver of tribal immunities. Pan Am. Co. v Sycuan Band of Mission Indians, 884 F.2d 416, 418 (9 th Cir., 1989) (finding that where Congress has not specifically abrogated tribal immunity from suit, only tribal consent gives the courts the jurisdictional authority to adjudicate claims raised by or against tribal defendants ) (A) waiver of sovereign immunity cannot be inferred from [an Indian] Nation s engagement in commercial activity. Sac and Fox Nation, 47 F.3d, 1061, 1063 (10 th Cir., 1995) (finding that tribe was immune from suit in state court although suit resulted from commercial activity engaged in by the tribe outside of the nation s reservation). See also Oklahoma Tax Comm'n v. Citizen Band Potawatomi Indian Tribe, 498 U.S. 505, 509 (1991) (although tribe consents to court s jurisdiction over claims brought by it, that consent does not waive sovereign immunity for counterclaims brought against it); Maynard v Narragansett Indian Tribe, 984 F.2d 14, 16 (1 st Cir,m 1993) (declining to evaluate several factors to infer a tribe s waiver of sovereign immunity); American Indian Agricultural Credit Consortium, Inc., v Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, 780 F.2d 1374, (8 th Cir., 1985)(holding that a tribe s sovereign immunity cannot be waived by implication in contract actions); Seminole Tribe v Houghtaling, 589 So. 2D 1030, 1032 (Fla. Memo: Dismiss Page 10 of 15 Case 3:18-cv SLG Document 19 Filed 07/06/18 Page 10 of 15
11 C. The Terms Of The Proposed Transportation Agreement Did Not Include A Consent To This Suit. Even if the Tribe had elected to enter a contract with Alaska Logistics, nowhere in Alaska Logistics' proposed Transportation Agreement are any terms that would establish consent to this lawsuit. The relevant portion of Alaska Logistics proposed Transportation Agreement reads 4.3 Any action brought by either party to enforce any term or provision of this contract shall be commenced in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington at Seattle, as appropriate. The parties submit to the exclusive personal and subject matter jurisdiction of the United State District Court located in Seattle, Washington with respect to any litigation arising out of this agreement, with the substantially prevailing party entitled to receive its reasonable legal fees and costs. Shipper hereby submits to the jurisdiction of the Courts of the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington at Seattle and consent to service of process by certified mail, return receipt requested, addressed in accordance with this contract. There are several obvious reasons why this provision does not constitute a consent to this suit by the Tribe. First, a signed agreement which permits a party to pursue rights and remedies provided by law, against a Tribe, provides for attorney fees in the event of a collection action, and that contains a choice of law provision, does not constitute a express waiver of sovereign immunity. American Indian Agricultural Credit Consortium, Inc., v Standing Rock Sioux Tribe,780 F.2d 1374, 1381 (8 th Cir., 1985); replied upon Ramey Const. Co. v Apache Tribe, 673 F.2d 315, 319 (10 th Cir., 1982) (holding no waiver of sovereign immunity where Tribe (1) agreed to an attorneys fees clause in the contract; (2) entered into a loan agreement with the Bank obligating the Tribe to duly pay and discharge... all App. 1991) (holding that a tribe was immune from suit despite its involvement in a commercial enterprise ), aff d,611 So.2d 1235 (Fla. 1993). Memo: Dismiss Page 11 of 15 Case 3:18-cv SLG Document 19 Filed 07/06/18 Page 11 of 15
12 claims of any kind... ; (3) submitted a certificate to the United States Economic Development Agency stating that the contract documents constitute valid and legally binding obligations upon the parties... ; (4) obtained payment and performance bonds from a surety; (5) consented to partial summary judgment with respect to the contract retainage; and (6) including a sue or be sued clause in the tribal corporate charter.) The relevant clause in Alaska Logistics' proposed Transportation Agreement provides no greater waiver than in the Ramey case. Second, this is not a suit commenced in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington at Seattle. This is a suit commenced in the United States District Court for the District of Alaska. When a tribe waives its sovereign immunity, it may prescribe the terms and conditions on which it consents to be sued, and the manner in which the suit shall be conducted. Arizona v Tohono O'Odham Nation, 818 F.3d 549, 562 (9 th Cir., 2016); See also J.L. Ward Assoc., Inc., v Great Plains Tribal Chairmen s Health Bd, 842 F.Supp.2d 1163, (DCSDSD, 2012) citing Mo. River Serv, Inc. v Omaha Tribe, 267 F.3d 848, 852 (8 th Cir., 2001) and Oglala Sioux v C.W. Enter. Inc., 542 F. 3d, 224, 231 (8 th Cir., 2008). The language referenced by Alaska Logistics does not consent to a suit in this Court, and cannot be construed as a waiver of immunity that would allow this action in this Court. Third, the clause at issue provides that the parties and, more specifically, the Shipper submit to the jurisdiction of the Federal Court in Washington. However, the agreement defines the terms parties to apply only to Alaska Logistics and Goldstream. Memo: Dismiss Page 12 of 15 Case 3:18-cv SLG Document 19 Filed 07/06/18 Page 12 of 15
13 Goldstream is identified as the Shipper. Under the terms of the agreement, the Tribe is neither the party nor the Shipper. While the language at issue suggests that parties and the shipper submit to federal court jurisdiction, the language does not apply to the Tribe since the Tribe is neither a party nor the Shipper. A plain reading of the clause referenced in Alaska Logistics' pleadings does not refer to the Tribe in any way, and does not constitute any express consent by the Tribe to submit to the jurisdiction of any court. Fourth, the clause at issue only addresses contract claims at best. Only two of Alaska Logistics' six counts are contract claims: i.e. Count I Breach of Contract, and Count II - Breach of Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing. 27 The remaining Counts making allegations against the Tribe (Count III- Quantum Meruit; Count IV- Misrepresentation; and Count VI- Unfair Trade Practices) are not contractual claims. Sec 4.3 of the Agreement relates only to an action to enforce any term or provision of this contract. Counts III, IV and VI are not claims attempting to enforce a term or provision of the Contract. In Arizona v Tohono O'Odham Nation, 818 F.3d 549 (9 th Cir., 2016) the Tribe had signed a waiver of immunity relative to claims for violation of a gaming compact. Arizona brought other non-compact claims, including claims for fraud in the inducement, material misrepresentation, and promissory estoppel. See 818 F.3d, at As noted above, the 9 th Circuit noted that a tribe has the authority to limit its immunity waiver to address specified claims. Claims outside those specified claims remain barred by the tribe's sovereign immunity. Id. In applying this principal, the 9 th Circuit applied the canon of 27 Complaint at para Memo: Dismiss Page 13 of 15 Case 3:18-cv SLG Document 19 Filed 07/06/18 Page 13 of 15
14 construction obligating [the court] to construe a statute abrogating tribal rights narrowly and most favorably towards tribal interests. 818 F.3d, at 562, citing Rincon Band of Luiseno Mission Indians v Schwarzenegger, 606 F. 3d 1019, 1028n 9 (9 th Cir. 2010) In this case, as in Tohono O'Odham, the Plaintiff asserts non-contract claims. In particular, Alaska Logistics' fraud/misrepresentation are the same considered by the Court in Tohono O'Odham. Thus, even if the Tribe had elected to enter a the Agreement with Alaska Logistics, the language relied upon by Alaska Logistics would not constitute a waiver sovereign immunity as to the non-contract claims and this Court should, at a minimum, dismiss Counts III, IV and VI. IV. CONCLUSION In summary, this Court should dismiss Alaska Logistics' claims against the Tribe. Alaska Logistics' proposed Transportation Agreement is neither an explicit nor unequivocal waiver of the Tribe's sovereign immunity because the Tribe 1) was not a party to Alaska Logistics' proposed Transportation Agreement, 2) did not sign or otherwise agree to the terms of the agreement, and 3) the forum selection clause in the agreement did not constitute consent to this suit on behalf of the Tribe. The Court should dismiss Alaska Logistics' claims against the Tribe. Respectfully submitted this 6 th day of June, 2018 s// Michael J. Walleri Michael J. Walleri (ABA # ) GAZEWOOD & WEINER, PC th Ave., Suite 200 Fairbanks, AK Memo: Dismiss Page 14 of 15 Case 3:18-cv SLG Document 19 Filed 07/06/18 Page 14 of 15
15 tel: (907) fax: (907) Attorney for Newtok Village d/b/a Newtok Village Council Memo: Dismiss Page 15 of 15 Case 3:18-cv SLG Document 19 Filed 07/06/18 Page 15 of 15
Case 3:18-cv SLG Document 31 Filed 08/03/18 Page 1 of 11
Michael J. Walleri (ABA #7906060) GAZEWOOD & WEINER, PC 1008 16 th Ave., Suite 200 Fairbanks, AK 99701 tel: (907) 452-5196 fax: (907) 456-7058 walleri@gci.net Attorneys for Defendant Newtok Village IN
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 532 U. S. (2001) 1 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of
More informationCase 3:09-cv WKW-TFM Document 12 Filed 05/04/2009 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT
Case 3:09-cv-00305-WKW-TFM Document 12 Filed 05/04/2009 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT T.P. JOHNSON HOLDINGS, LLC. JACK M. JOHNSON AND TERI S. JOHNSON, AS SHAREHOLDERS/MEMBERS,
More informationCase 5:09-cv RDR-KGS Document 19 Filed 11/05/09 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
Case 5:09-cv-04107-RDR-KGS Document 19 Filed 11/05/09 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS ROBERT NANOMANTUBE, vs. Plaintiff, Case No. 09-4107-RDR THE KICKAPOO TRIBE
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA ALASKA LOGISTICS, LLC, v. Plaintiff, NEWTOK VILLAGE COUNCIL and GOLDSTREAM ENGINEERING, INC., Case No. 3:18-cv-00108-SLG Defendants. ORDER
More informationCase 1:18-cv DLH-CSM Document 12 Filed 05/07/18 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA
Case 1:18-cv-00057-DLH-CSM Document 12 Filed 05/07/18 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA Shingobee Builders, Inc., Case No. 1:18-cv-00057-DLH-CSM v. Plaintiff, North
More informationCase 1:15-cv MV-KK Document 19 Filed 03/22/16 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO. Vs. Case No: 1:15-cv MV-KK
Case 1:15-cv-00799-MV-KK Document 19 Filed 03/22/16 Page 1 of 9 NAVAJO NATION, And NORTHERN EDGE NAVAJO CASINO; Plaintiffs, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO Vs. Case No: 1:15-cv-00799-MV-KK
More informationCase 1:12-cv JDL Document 34 Filed 08/06/14 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 330 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE
Case 1:12-cv-00354-JDL Document 34 Filed 08/06/14 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 330 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE Elizabeth Rassi, ) ) Civil Action No. 1:12-cv-00354 Plaintiff
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS BATES ASSOCIATES, L.L.C., Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant- Appellee, FOR PUBLICATION September 14, 2010 9:15 a.m. v No. 288826 Wayne Circuit Court 132 ASSOCIATES, L.L.C.,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA I. RELIEF REQUESTED
Dustin C. Hamilton, ABA #00 LeGros Buchanan 0 Delridge Way SW, Suite 00 Seattle, Washington 0 Phone: 0--0 Facsimile: 0-- Attorneys for Plaintiff IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case 5:11-cv-01078-D Document 16 Filed 11/04/11 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA APACHE TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA, vs. Plaintiff, TGS ANADARKO LLC; and WELLS
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION
Case 3:15-cv-00116-D Document 50 Filed 11/17/15 Page 1 of 13 PageID 326 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION IN RE: INTRAMTA SWITCHED ACCESS CHARGES LITIGATION
More informationWAIVING SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY GROWS TRICKIER Catherine Baker Stetson & Jennifer Lee Chino 2006
WAIVING SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY GROWS TRICKIER Catherine Baker Stetson & Jennifer Lee Chino 2006 Providing limited waivers of a tribe s immunity from suit has become a virtual necessity in today s legal and
More informationCase 2:17-cv RSL Document 15 Filed 10/05/17 Page 1 of 11
Case :-cv-0-rsl Document Filed 0/0/ Page of Honorable Robert S. Lasnik 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB, DOING BUSINESS AS CHRISTIANA
More informationJAMES LAWRENCE BROWN, Plaintiff/Appellant, OFFICER K. ROBERTSON #Y234, YAVAPAI-APACHE NATION POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendants/Appellees.
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION. UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE. IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case :-cv-0-who Document Filed /0/ Page of BOUTIN JONES INC. Daniel S. Stouder, SBN dstouder@boutinjones.com Amy L. O Neill, SBN aoneill@boutinjones.com Capitol Mall, Suite 00 Sacramento, CA -0 Telephone:
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 4:07-cv-00642-CVE-PJC Document 46 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 01/04/2008 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA WAGONER COUNTY RURAL WATER DISTRICT NO. 2, an agency of the
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case :0-cv-0-VAP-JCR Document Filed 0/0/00 Page of 0 0 GREGORY F. MULLALLY, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Plaintiff, HAVASU LANDING CASINO, AN ENTERPRISE OF THE CHEMEHUEVI
More informationcv IN THE. United States Court of Appeals FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. ELIZABETH A. TREMBLAY, Plaintiff-Appellant,
Case 14-2031, Document 43, 11/03/2014, 1361074, Page 1 of 21 14-2031-cv To Be Argued By: PROLOY K. DAS, ESQ. IN THE United States Court of Appeals FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT ELIZABETH A. TREMBLAY, Plaintiff-Appellant,
More informationCase3:11-cv JW Document14 Filed08/29/11 Page1 of 8
Case:-cv-00-JW Document Filed0// Page of 0 Robert A. Rosette (CA SBN ) Richard J. Armstrong (CA SBN ) Nicole St. Germain (CA SBN ) ROSETTE, LLP Attorneys at Law Blue Ravine Rd., Suite Folsom, CA 0 () -0
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION
Case 1:14-cv-00594-CG-M Document 11 Filed 02/20/15 Page 1 of 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION CHRISTINE WILLIAMS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) CIVIL ACTION
More informationCase ABA Doc 10 Filed 02/10/16 Entered 02/10/16 14:10:34 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 6
Document Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY Caption in Compliance with D.N.J. LBR 9004-1(b) McCARTER & ENGLISH, LLP Kate R. Buck 100 Mulberry Street Four Gateway Center Newark,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION
Case 1:14-cv-00594-CG-M Document 15 Filed 03/23/15 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION CHRISTINE WILLIAMS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) CIVIL ACTION
More informationCase 5:07-cv HE Document 20 Filed 06/01/2007 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 5:07-cv-00118-HE Document 20 Filed 06/01/2007 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA TERRY MURPHY d/b/a ENVIRONMENTAL ) PRODUCTS, and ROGER LACKEY, )
More informationCase 1:16-cv JAP-KK Document 42 Filed 10/17/17 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
Case 1:16-cv-01093-JAP-KK Document 42 Filed 10/17/17 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO AMERIND RISK MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, a federally chartered Section 17 Tribal Corporation,
More informationCase 1:16-cv JAP-KK Document 38 Filed 09/06/17 Page 1 of 17
Case 1:16-cv-01093-JAP-KK Document 38 Filed 09/06/17 Page 1 of 17 MATT LAW OFFICE Terryl T. Matt, Esq. 310 East Main Cut Bank, MT 59427 Telephone: (406) 873-4833 Fax No.: (406) 873-4944 terrylm@mattlawoffice.com
More informationCase 1:13-cv S-LDA Document 16 Filed 08/29/13 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 178 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
Case 1:13-cv-00185-S-LDA Document 16 Filed 08/29/13 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 178 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND ) DOUGLAS J. LUCKERMAN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) C.A. No. 13-185
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) INTRODUCTION
Case :-cv-00-bas-ags Document - Filed /0/ PageID. Page of 0 0 0 Kathryn Clenney, SBN Barona Band of Mission Indians 0 Barona Road Lakeside, CA 00 Tel.: - FAX: -- kclenney@barona-nsn.gov Attorney for Specially-Appearing
More informationC & L ENTERPRISES, INC. v. CITIZEN BAND POTA- WATOMI INDIAN TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA. certiorari to the court of civil appeals of oklahoma
OCTOBER TERM, 2000 411 Syllabus C & L ENTERPRISES, INC. v. CITIZEN BAND POTA- WATOMI INDIAN TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA certiorari to the court of civil appeals of oklahoma No. 00 292. Argued March 19, 2001 Decided
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA (1) KAREN HARRIS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. 11-CV-654-GKF-FHM ) (2) MUSCOGEE (CREEK) NATION d/b/a ) RIVER SPIRIT CASINO,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON
Kimberly D Aquila, OSB #96255 kim.daquila@grandronde.org Deneen Aubertin Keller, OSB #94240 deneen.aubertin@grandronde.org Tribal Attorney s Office Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde 9615 Grand Ronde Road
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION II CALIFORNIA PARKING SERVICES, INC. Plaintiff and Appellant
No. E050306 SC No. RIC 535124 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION II CALIFORNIA PARKING SERVICES, INC. Plaintiff and Appellant VS SOBOBA BAND OF LUISENO
More informationCase 3:15-cv TSL-RHW Document 12 Filed 03/17/15 Page 1 of 12
Case 3:15-cv-00105-TSL-RHW Document 12 Filed 03/17/15 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI JACKSON DIVISION KENNY PAYNE, on behalf of the Estate of
More informationCase 5:15-cv L Document 1 Filed 03/09/15 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 5:15-cv-00241-L Document 1 Filed 03/09/15 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA (1 JOHN R. SHOTTON, an individual, v. Plaintiff, (2 HOWARD F. PITKIN, in his individual
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case :-cv-000-wqh -BGS Document 0 Filed 0// Page of 0 0 GLORIA MORRISON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Plaintiff, vs. VIEJAS ENTERPRISES, an entity; VIEJAS BAND OF KUMEYAAY
More informationCase 2:07-cv JAP-RLP Document 28 Filed 03/19/2009 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
Case 2:07-cv-01024-JAP-RLP Document 28 Filed 03/19/2009 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO DAVID BALES, Plaintiff, vs. Civ. No. 07-1024 JP/RLP CHICKASAW NATION
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 4:11-cv-00782-JHP -PJC Document 22 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 03/15/12 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA EDDIE SANTANA ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 11-CV-782-JHP-PJC
More informationCase 3:12-cv BEN-JMA Document 4 Filed 10/30/12 Page 1 of 23
Case :-cv-00-ben-jma Document Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 Art Bunce, SBN 0 Law Offices of Art Bunce 0 State Place, Suite C P.O. Box Escondido, CA 0 Tel.: 0--0 FAX: 0-- buncelaw@aol.com Kathryn Clenney, SBN Barona
More informationv. NO. 29,799 APPEAL FROM THE WORKERS COMPENSATION ADMINISTRATION Gregory D. Griego, Workers Compensation Judge
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Reports. Please see Rule 1-0 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. Please
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 5:08-cv-00429-D Document 85 Filed 04/16/2010 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA TINA MARIE SOMERLOTT ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) ) Case No. CIV-08-429-D
More informationCase 3:15-cv TSL-RHW Document 16 Filed 04/17/15 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI NORTHERN DIVISION
Case 3:15-cv-00105-TSL-RHW Document 16 Filed 04/17/15 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI NORTHERN DIVISION KENNY PAYNE, ON BEHALF OF THE ESTATE OF BETTY SUE HAMRICK
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case 2:15-cv-02463-RGK-MAN Document 31 Filed 07/02/15 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #:335 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JS-6 CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Case No. CV 15-02463-RGK (MANx)
More informationCase 2:17-cv RBS-DEM Document 21 Filed 08/07/17 Page 1 of 20 PageID# 175
Case 2:17-cv-00302-RBS-DEM Document 21 Filed 08/07/17 Page 1 of 20 PageID# 175 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Norfolk Division MATTHEW HOWARD, Plaintiff, V. Civil Action
More informationSupreme Court of the United States
No. 10-4 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States GARY HOFFMAN, v. Petitioner, SANDIA RESORT AND CASINO, Respondents. On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Appeals of the State of New Mexico
More informationCase 1:17-cv JCH-KBM Document 9 Filed 05/25/17 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
Case 1:17-cv-00258-JCH-KBM Document 9 Filed 05/25/17 Page 1 of 5 MILTON TOYA, Petitioner, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO vs. No. CV 17-00258 JCH/KBM AL CASAMENTO, DIRECTOR,
More informationCASE 0:16-cv JRT-LIB Document 26 Filed 10/07/16 Page 1 of 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
CASE 0:16-cv-01797-JRT-LIB Document 26 Filed 10/07/16 Page 1 of 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Leigh Harper, Court File No. 16-cv-1797 (JRT/LIB) Plaintiff, v. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
More informationCase 2:10-cv DGC Document 16 Filed 04/14/10 Page 1 of 12
Case 2:10-cv-00533-DGC Document 16 Filed 04/14/10 Page 1 of 12 Timothy J. Humphrey, e-mail: tjh@stetsonlaw.com Catherine Baker Stetson, e-mail: cbs@stetsonlaw.com Jana L. Walker, e-mail: jlw@stetsonlaw.com
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case 3:14-cv-02724-AJB-NLS Document 15 Filed 12/31/14 Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Little Fawn Boland (CA No. 240181) Ceiba Legal, LLP 35 Madrone Park Circle Mill Valley, CA
More informationDISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT SEMINOLE TRIBE OF FLORIDA, Petitioner, v. DELORES SCHINNELLER, Respondent. No. 4D15-1704 [July 27, 2016] Petition for writ of certiorari
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Case 0:09-cv-01798-MJD-RLE Document 17 Filed 11/02/09 Page 1 of 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA John H. Reuer and Larry R. Maetzold, vs. Plaintiffs, Grand Casino Hinckley and Grand
More informationSupreme Court of the United States
No. 17-387 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States UPPER SKAGIT INDIAN TRIBE, v. Petitioner, SHARLINE LUNDGREN AND RAY LUNDGREN, Respondents. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA BILLINGS DIVISION
Case 1:17-cv-00048-BMM-TJC Document 33 Filed 02/09/18 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA BILLINGS DIVISION MICHAEL F. LAFORGE, CV-17-48-BLG-BMM-TJC Plaintiff, vs.
More informationCase 2:08-cv SHM-dkv Document 5 Filed 05/07/2008 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:08-cv-02253-SHM-dkv Document 5 Filed 05/07/2008 Page 1 of 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE WESTERN DIVISION AT MEMPHIS MEMPHIS BIOFUELS, LLC, ) ) Plaintiff,
More informationSUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA
REL: 09/29/2017 Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Alabama Appellate
More informationNo. DA BRIEF OF APPELLEES. On Appeal from the Montana Twentieth Judicial District Court, Lake County, The Honorable James A.
08/08/2016 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA Case Number: DA 16-0282 No. DA 16-0282 ROBERT CRAWFORD, V. Plaintiff and Appellant, CASEY COUTURE; FLATHEAD TRIBAL POLICE OFFICER; FLATHEAD TRIBAL
More informationCase No. CIV HE Judge Joe Heaton, United States District Judge, Presiding
Case 5:14-cv-01278-HE Document 13 Filed 02/03/15 Page 1 of 22 Case No. CIV-14-1278-HE Judge Joe Heaton, United States District Judge, Presiding IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA
Case :-cv-0-bhs Document Filed 0/0/ Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 0 DOTTI CHAMBLIN, v. Plaintiff, TIMOTHY J. GREENE, Chairman of the Makah Tribal Council,
More informationCase No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
Case: 09-3347 Document: 01018380437 Date Filed: 03/09/2010 Page: 1 Case No. 09-3347 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ROBERT NANOMANTUBE vs. Appellant THE KICKAPOO TRIBE IN KANSAS,
More informationSupreme Court of the United States
No. 12-376 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States JOHN V. FURRY, as Personal Representative Of the Estate and Survivors of Tatiana H. Furry, v. Petitioner, MICCOSUKEE TRIBE OF INDIANS OF FLORIDA; MICCOSUKEE
More informationMEMORANDUM OF POINTS AN AUTHORITIES
Case :-cv-000-ckj Document 0 Filed 0// Page of 0 0 0 ELIZABETH A. STRANGE First Assistant United States Attorney District of Arizona J. COLE HERNANDEZ Assistant U.S. Attorney Arizona State Bar No. 00 e-mail:
More informationPUBLISH TENTH CIRCUIT. Plaintiffs-Appellees, No
PUBLISH FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit September 19, 2007 Elisabeth A. Shumaker UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Clerk of Court TENTH CIRCUIT MINER ELECTRIC, INC.; RUSSELL E. MINER, v.
More informationMichigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community
Public Land and Resources Law Review Volume 0 Fall 2014 Case Summaries Wesley J. Furlong University of Montana School of Law, wjf@furlongbutler.com Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.umt.edu/plrlr
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN PLAINTIFF S RESPONSE TO THE DEFENDANTS JOINT MOTION TO DISMISS
Case 1:17-cv-01083-JTN-ESC ECF No. 31 filed 05/04/18 PageID.364 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN JOY SPURR Plaintiff, v. Case No. 1:17-cv-01083 Hon. Janet
More informationCase 6:17-cv AA Document 18 Filed 04/06/17 Page 1 of 12
Case 6:17-cv-00123-AA Document 18 Filed 04/06/17 Page 1 of 12 Anthony S. Broadman, OSB No. 112417 8606 35th Avenue NE, Suite L1 P.O. Box 15416 PH: 206-557-7509 FX: 206-299-7690 anthony@galandabroadman.com
More informationDocket No. 25,582 COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW MEXICO 2006-NMCA-020, 139 N.M. 85, 128 P.3d 513 December 21, 2005, Filed
R & R DELI, INC. V. SANTA ANA STAR CASINO, 2006-NMCA-020, 139 N.M. 85, 128 P.3d 513 R & R DELI, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SANTA ANA STAR CASINO; TAMAYA ENTERPRISES, INC.; THE PUEBLO OF SANTA ANA; CONRAD
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION ORDER
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, v. No. 14-00783-CV-W-DW CWB SERVICES, LLC, et al., Defendants. ORDER Before the Court
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT KRYSTAL ENERGY COMPANY, No. 02-17047 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. v. CV-01-01970-MHM NAVAJO NATION, Defendant-Appellee. ORDER AND AMENDED
More informationCase4:09-cv CW Document16 Filed06/04/09 Page1 of 16
Case:0-cv-0-CW Document Filed0/0/0 Page of 0 EDMUND G. BROWN JR. Attorney General of California SARA J. DRAKE Supervising Deputy Attorney General PETER H. KAUFMAN Deputy Attorney General State Bar No.
More informationNo IN I~ GARY HOFFMAN, SANDIA RESORT AND CASINO, Respondents.
No. 10-4 JLLZ9 IN I~ GARY HOFFMAN, V. Petitioner, SANDIA RESORT AND CASINO, Respondents. On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the Court of Appeals of the State of New Mexico BRIEF IN OPPOSITION OF SANDIA
More informationFILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/01/2013 INDEX NO /2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 270 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/01/2013
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/01/2013 INDEX NO. 652140/2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 270 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/01/2013 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., AS TRUSTEE,
More informationCase 2:11-cv KJM -GGH Document 4 Filed 12/19/11 Page 1 of 6
Case :-cv-0-kjm -GGH Document Filed // Page of IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 0 BRIAN GARCIA, vs. Plaintiff, UNITED AUBURN INDIAN COMMUNITY, et al., Defendants.
More informationKey Employment and Labor Issues Affecting Tribal Entities, ANCs and NHOs
888 17th Street, NW, 11th Floor Washington, DC 20006 Tel: (202) 857-1000 Fax: (202) 857-0200 www.pilieromazza.com Key Employment and Labor Issues Affecting Tribal Entities, ANCs and NHOs In Partnership
More informationCase 4:15-cv BMM Document 37 Filed 08/31/15 Page 1 of 12 FILED
Case 4:15-cv-00028-BMM Document 37 Filed 08/31/15 Page 1 of 12 FILED James L. Vogel, Attorney-At-Law P.O. Box 525 Hardin, Montana 59034 (406)665-3900 Great FaMs Fax (406)665-3901 (jim vmt@email.com) Attorney
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA KONIAG, INC., an Alaska Corporation, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) ANDREW AIRWAYS, INC. et al, ) ) Defendants ) ) MOTION AND MEMORANDUM TO DISMISS
More informationCase 2:17-cv JMA-SIL Document 9-1 Filed 04/27/18 Page 1 of 21 PageID #: 31 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Case 2:17-cv-05869-JMA-SIL Document 9-1 Filed 04/27/18 Page 1 of 21 PageID #: 31 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ----------------------------------------------------------------X
More informationCA ; CA Pascua Yaqui Tribe Court of Appeals
CA-09-004; CA-09-005 Pascua Yaqui Tribe Court of Appeals MARY LOU BOONE, Evelyn James, Henry Whiskers, Clyde Whiskers, Danlyn James, and the SAN JUAN SOUTHERN PAIUTE TRIBE, a federally recognized Indian
More informationCase 2:13-cv KJM-KJN Document 30 Filed 05/09/14 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10
Case :-cv-00-kjm-kjn Document 0 Filed 0/0/ Page of KENNETH R. WILLIAMS, State Bar No. 0 Attorney at Law 0 th Street, th Floor Sacramento, CA Telephone: () - Attorney for Plaintiffs Jamul Action Committee,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION 1:17CV240
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION 1:17CV240 JOSEPH CLARK, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) MEMORANDUM AND ) RECOMMENDATION HARRAH S NC CASINO COMPANY,
More informationNo STEVEN ROSENBERG, HUALAPAI INDIAN NATION, On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The Supreme Court Of The State Of Arizona
No. 09-742 STEVEN ROSENBERG, Petitioner, HUALAPAI INDIAN NATION, Respondent. On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The Supreme Court Of The State Of Arizona BRIEF IN OPPOSITION Counsel of Record THEODORE
More informationIn the Supreme Court of the United States
No. In the Supreme Court of the United States STATE OF MICHIGAN, PETITIONER v. BAY MILLS INDIAN COMMUNITY ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
More informationNo. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. BOB BURRELL and SUSAN BURRELL,
No. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES BOB BURRELL and SUSAN BURRELL, v. Petitioners, LEONARD ARMIJO, Governor of Santa Ana Pueblo and Acting Chief of Santa Ana Tribal Police; LAWRENCE MONTOYA,
More informationJournal of Dispute Resolution
Journal of Dispute Resolution Volume 2002 Issue 1 Article 14 2002 Ability of Native American Tribes to Waive Their Tribal Sovereign Immunity in Clear and Unequivocal Contracts to Arbitrate - C&(and)L Enterprises,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case :-cv-00-jah-ksc Document Filed 0// PageID. Page of 0 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OUTLIERS COLLECTIVE, a Nonprofit Mutual Benefit Corporation, vs. Plaintiff, THE
More informationTHE CONTINUING ATTACK ON TRIBAL SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY AT THE SUPREME COURT
THE CONTINUING ATTACK ON TRIBAL SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY AT THE SUPREME COURT BY GRAYDON DEAN LUTHEY, JR. Immunity of tribal officers and employees from suit in state and federal court for tort liability should
More informationCase 5:16-cv RSWL-KK Document 11 Filed 04/19/16 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #:95
Case :-cv-00-rswl-kk Document Filed 0// Page of Page ID #: Kathryn Clenney, SBN Barona Band of Mission Indians 0 Barona Road Lakeside, CA 00 Tel.: - FAX: -- kclenney@barona-nsn.gov Attorneys for specially-appearing
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case :0-cv-000-LAB-JMA Document Filed 0//00 Page of 0 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CARL EUGENE MULLINS, vs. THE SYCUAN BAND OF THE KUMEYAAY NATION; et al., Plaintiff, Defendants.
More informationCase: 1:08-cv Document #: 30 Filed: 03/24/11 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:107
Case: 1:08-cv-00825 Document #: 30 Filed: 03/24/11 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:107 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION MERIT MANAGEMENT GROUP, a Nevada limited partnership,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff, Defendant.
Case :-cv-0-bas-ags Document 0 Filed 0/0/ PageID. Page of 0 CHRISTOBAL MUNOZ, v. BARONA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Plaintiff, Defendant. Case
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: U. S. (1998) 1 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES No. 96 1037 KIOWA TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA, PETITIONER v. MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGIES, INC. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS OF OKLAHOMA,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Case :-cv-00-jad-gwf Document Filed 0// Page of 0 Jeffrey D. Gross (AZ Bar No. 00) Christopher W. Thompson (AZ Bar No. 0) GALLAGHER & KENNEDY, P.A. East Camelback Road Phoenix, Arizona 0- Telephone: (0)
More informationCase 1:08-cv TLL-CEB Document 14 Filed 08/17/2009 Page 1 of 23 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION
Case 1:08-cv-11522-TLL-CEB Document 14 Filed 08/17/2009 Page 1 of 23 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION Jennifer Sober, v. Plaintiff, Case No. 1:08-cv-11552-TLL-CEB
More informationCase 1:08-cv TLL-CEB Document 19 Filed 10/09/2009 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION
Case 1:08-cv-11522-TLL-CEB Document 19 Filed 10/09/2009 Page 1 of 5 JENNIFER SOBER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION Plaintiff, Case Number 08-11522-BC v. Honorable
More informationCase 1:11-cv LH-LFG Document 56 Filed 06/08/12 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO. v. No. 1:11-CV BB-LFG
Case 1:11-cv-00957-LH-LFG Document 56 Filed 06/08/12 Page 1 of 12 PUEBLO OF SANTA ANA, and TAMAYA ENTERPRISES, INC., Plaintiffs, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO v. No. 1:11-CV-00957-BB-LFG
More informationSupreme Court of Louisiana. MEYER & ASSOCIATES, INC. v. COUSHATTA TRIBE OF LOUISIANA. No CC Sept. 23, 2008.
--- So.2d ----, 2008 WL 4308084 (La.), 2007-2256 (La. 9/23/08) Supreme Court of Louisiana. MEYER & ASSOCIATES, INC. v. COUSHATTA TRIBE OF LOUISIANA. No. 2007-CC-2256. Sept. 23, 2008. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI
More informationCase 3:17-cv AA Document 28 Filed 01/30/17 Page 1 of 14
Case 3:17-cv-00038-AA Document 28 Filed 01/30/17 Page 1 of 14 Josh Newton, OSB# 983087 Brent Hall, OSB# 992762 jn@karnopp.com bhh@karnopp.com Jeffry S. Hinman, OSB# 096821 Karnopp Petersen LLP jsh@karnopp.com
More informationCase 5:08-cv D Document 71 Filed 03/24/2009 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 5:08-cv-00199-D Document 71 Filed 03/24/2009 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA SWANDA BROTHERS, INC., an Oklahoma Corporation, Plaintiff, vs. Case
More informationCase 1:17-cv KG-KK Document 55 Filed 01/04/18 Page 1 of 10
Case 1:17-cv-00654-KG-KK Document 55 Filed 01/04/18 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO THE PUEBLO OF ISLETA, a federallyrecognized Indian tribe, THE PUEBLO
More informationAPPEAL from an order of the circuit court for Vilas County: NEAL A. NIELSEN, III, Judge. Affirmed. Before Hoover, P.J., Stark and Hruz, JJ.
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED March 10, 2015 Diane M. Fremgen Clerk of Court of Appeals NOTICE This opinion is subject to further editing. If published, the official version will appear in
More informationNo IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Case: 10-56671 11/08/2012 ID: 8394026 DktEntry: 38-2 Page: 1 of 26 No. 10-56671 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JIM MAXWELL and KAY MAXWELL, individually and as guardians of
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION Case No. 1:17-cv MR-DLH
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION Case No. 1:17-cv-00240-MR-DLH JOSEPH CLARK, On Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated, vs.
More information