cv IN THE. United States Court of Appeals FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. ELIZABETH A. TREMBLAY, Plaintiff-Appellant,
|
|
- Amelia Atkinson
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Case , Document 43, 11/03/2014, , Page 1 of 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, -vs- MOHEGAN SUN CASINO, Defendant-Appellee, ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT 3:12-CV RNC BRIEF OF DEFENDANT-APPELLEE MOHEGAN SUN CASINO For the Defendant-Appellee MOHEGAN SUN CASINO PROLOY K. DAS, ESQ. ANDREW L. HOULDING, ESQ. ROME MCGUIGAN, P.C. One State Street Hartford, CT Tel: 860/ Fax: 860/
2 Case , Document 43, 11/03/2014, , Page 2 of 21 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE TABLE OF AUTHORITIES... i COUNTERSTATEMENT OF JURISDICTION... 1 I. DISTRICT COURT'S JURISDICTION... 1 II. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT JURISDICTION... 1 COUNTERSTATEMENT OF THE ISSUES PRESENTED FOR REVIEW... 2 COUNTERSTATEMENT OF THE CASE... 3 I. DISTRICT COURT PROCEEDINGS... 3 II. APPELLATE COURT PROCEEDINGS... 4 COUNTERSTATEMENT OF THE FACTS... 4 SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT... 6 ARGUMENT... 7 I. THE DISTRICT COURT PROPERLY GRANTED THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION BECAUSE THE PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT ALLEGING EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION AGAINST HER FORMER TRIBAL EMPLOYER WAS BARRED BY SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY... 7 A. Standard of Review... 7 B. The District Court Correctly Determined That The Mohegan Tribe Of Indians Of Connecticut Is A Federally- Recognized Indian Tribe... 8
3 Case , Document 43, 11/03/2014, , Page 3 of 21 C. The District Court Correctly Determined That The Mohegan Tribe s Sovereign Immunity Applies To The Mohegan Sun Casino D. The District Court Correctly Determined That Neither Title VII Nor The ADEA Abrogates The Defendant s Sovereign Immunity E. The Mohegan Tribe Has Enacted Legislation Authorizing The Assertion Of Employment Discrimination Claims, But Only In Tribal Court F. Plaintiff-Appellant s Brief Fails To Raise Any Cognizable Claims On Appeal CONCLUSION CERTIFICATION PER FED. R. APP. P. 32(a)(7)(c) CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE... 16
4 Case , Document 43, 11/03/2014, , Page 4 of 21 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES i PAGE Cases Atl. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Balfour Maclaine Int'l, 968 F.2d 196 (2d Cir.1992)... 7 Bassett v. Mashantucket Pequot Tribe, 204 F.3d 343 (2d Cir. 2000)...5, 9 Beecher v. Mohegan Tribe of Indians of Connecticut, 282 Conn. 130, 918 A.2d 880 (2007)... 5, 8, 9 California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, 480 U.S. 202 (1987)... 9 EEOC v. The Cherokee Nation, 871 F.2d 937 (10th Cir. 1989)...11 Garcia v. Akwesasne Housing Authority, 268 F.3d 76 (2nd Cir. 2001)...4, 12 Kiowa Tribe of Oklahoma v. Mfg. Technologies, Inc., 523 U.S. 751 (1998)... 4, 6, 1 Kizis v. Morse Diesel Intern., Inc., 260 Conn. 46, 794 A.2d 498, (Conn. 2002)... passim Makarova v. United States, 201 F.3d 110 (2d Cir.2000)... 7, 8, 13 Malik v. Meissner, 82 F.3d 560 (2d Cir.1996)... 7 Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community Et Al., 572 U.S. (2014)...10 Native American Mohegans v. United States, 184 F.Supp. 2d 198 (D.Conn. 2002)...5, 9 Oklahoma Tax Comm. v. Citizen Band Potawatomi Indian Tribe, 498 U.S. 505 (1991)...5, 9 Rzayeva v. U.S., 492 F.Supp.2d 60 (D.Conn. 2007)... 7 Sweet v. Sheehan, 235 F3d 80 (2000)... 8 Three Affiliated Tribes v. Wold Engineering, 476 U.S. 877 (1986)...10 Tilley v. Anixter Inc., 283 F.Supp.2d 729 (D.Conn.2003)... 7
5 Case , Document 43, 11/03/2014, , Page 5 of 21 United States v. United States Fidelity & Guar. Co., 309 U.S. 506 (1940)...5, 9 Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. (6 Pet.) 515 (1832)... 9 Statutes 25 U.S.C U.S.C U.S.C U.S.C , 3, 5, U.S.C. 2000e... passim Rules Fed. R.Civ. Pro. 12(b)(1)...7, 8 FRCP 12(b)(6)... 8 Other Authorities Article XIII, 1, of the Constitution of the Mohegan Tribe of Indians of Connecticut...10 Felix S. Cohen, Handbook of Federal Indian Law, (1982)... 9 Regulations 59 Fed. Reg. 12, (1994) as modified by 59 Fed. Reg , 6 ii
6 Case , Document 43, 11/03/2014, , Page 6 of 21 COUNTERSTATEMENT OF JURISDICTION I. DISTRICT COURT S JURISDICTION Pro se Plaintiff Appellant Elizabeth Tremblay brought a complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq. (Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) and 29 U.S.C. 621 et seq. (Age Discrimination in Employment Act) against Defendant- Appellee Mohegan Sun Casino. The District Court had federal question jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C However, as the District Court properly concluded, the Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the case because the suit was barred by sovereign immunity. II. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT JURISDICTION This Court has appellate jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1291, because the District Court s dismissal of the Plaintiff s case constitutes a final decision of the District Court. 1
7 Case , Document 43, 11/03/2014, , Page 7 of 21 COUNTERSTATEMENT OF THE ISSUES PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Whether the District Court properly granted the Defendant s Motion to Dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the Plaintiff s Complaint alleging employment discrimination against her former tribal employer was barred by sovereign immunity. 2
8 Case , Document 43, 11/03/2014, , Page 8 of 21 COUNTERSTATEMENT OF THE CASE I. DISTRICT COURT PROCEEDINGS Plaintiff-Appellant Elizabeth Tremblay is pro se and is proceeding in forma pauperis. Plaintiff s complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut on March 21, Plaintiff s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis was granted April 13, Plaintiff s complaint was not served until March 21, 2014, approximately two years later. Plaintiff alleged that she was subjected to employment discrimination by the Defendant in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq., and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, as amended, 29 U.S.C. 621 et seq. She alleged that she was terminated from the Defendant s employment on December 12, On May 20, 2014, the Court granted the Defendant s Motion to Dismiss based on sovereign immunity. The full text of the decision is as follows: ORDER granting [27] Motion to Dismiss; denying [28] Motion Not to Dismiss. Plaintiff brings this action against her former employer, the Mohegan Sun Casino, alleging employment discrimination in violation of Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ("ADEA"). The defendant has filed a motion to dismiss based on sovereign immunity. The motion is granted. The Mohegan Tribe of Indians of Connecticut, which operates the defendant Casino through the Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority ("MTGA"), is a federally recognized Indian tribe. "As a matter of federal law, an Indian tribe is subject to suit only where Congress has authorized the suit or the tribe 3
9 Case , Document 43, 11/03/2014, , Page 9 of 21 has waived its immunity." Kiowa Tribe of Oklahoma v. Mfg. Technologies, Inc., 523 U.S. 751, 754 (1998). Neither has occurred here. The Mohegan Tribe has not waived its immunity from suit in this Court, and the statutes under which plaintiff brings this action do not abrogate the Tribe's immunity. Title VII is expressly inapplicable to Indian tribes, 42 U.S.C. 2000e(b)(1), and nothing in the ADEA revokes tribal sovereign immunity from private lawsuits. Garcia v. Akwesasne Housing Authority, 268 F.3d 76, 86 (2d Cir. 2001). Thus, plaintiff cannot bring claims of employment discrimination against an Indian tribe under Title VII or the ADEA. The Mohegan Tribe has enacted legislation establishing a tribal court system as well as legislation waiving the sovereign immunity of the Tribe and the Gaming Authority for discrimination claims by employees against the MTGA, but only in the Mohegan Gaming Disputes Court. Thus, plaintiff's only remedy is to proceed in that Court. Accordingly, because this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over plaintiff's claims, defendant's motion to dismiss [ECF No. 27] is granted and plaintiff's motion not to dismiss [ECF No. 28] is denied. The Clerk is directed to close the case. So ordered. Signed by Judge Robert N. Chatigny on 05/20/2014. (Bialek, T.) II. APPELLATE COURT PROCEEDINGS The Plaintiff filed her Notice of Appeal on June 6, 2014, and her principal appellant brief on September 11, COUNTERSTATEMENT OF THE FACTS As the District Court correctly found, the Mohegan Tribe of Indians of Connecticut (the Mohegan Tribe ) is a federally recognized Indian tribe. See Mohegan Land Claims Settlement Act, 25 U.S.C. 1775(a) et seq; see also 59 Fed. Reg. 12, (1994) as modified by 59 Fed. Reg (final determination that the Mohegan Indian Tribe of Connecticut does exist as an Indian Tribe); see also, Kizis v. Morse Diesel Intern., Inc., 260 Conn. 46, 55, 794 4
10 Case , Document 43, 11/03/2014, , Page 10 of 21 A.2d 498, (Conn. 2002)(Mohegan Tribe is recognized by an act of Congress and by the state of Connecticut); Beecher v. Mohegan Tribe of Indians of Connecticut, 282 Conn. 130, 918 A.2d 880 (2007). The Mohegan Tribe, as a federally-recognized tribe, is a sovereign entity and immune from unconsented suit. Kizis, supra; Beecher, supra; Native American Mohegans v. United States, 184 F.Supp. 2d 198 (D.Conn. 2002). It is by now well established that Indian tribes possess the common-law immunity from suit traditionally enjoyed by sovereign powers. See, e.g., Oklahoma Tax Comm. v. Citizen Band Potawatomi Indian Tribe, 498 U.S. 505, 509 (1991); United States v. United States Fidelity & Guar. Co., 309 U.S. 506, 512 (1940). Bassett v. Mashantucket Pequot Tribe, 204 F.3d 343, 356 (2d Cir. 2000). The Plaintiff brought this suit alleging violations of Title VII of the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq. and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. 621, et seq. However, the Mohegan Tribe has not waived its immunity from suits in federal court, and the statutes under which Plaintiff brought this action do not abrogate tribal sovereign immunity. As the District Court properly found, claims of employment discrimination made under these two statutes against an Indian tribal employer are barred by sovereign immunity. 5
11 Case , Document 43, 11/03/2014, , Page 11 of 21 SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT The Defendant, Mohegan Sun Casino, is operated by the Mohegan Tribe through the Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority. The Mohegan Tribe is a federallyrecognized Indian tribe and, therefore, is a sovereign entity that is immune from unconsented suit. The recognition of tribal sovereignty promotes and protects the policies of tribal self-determination, economic development, and cultural and political autonomy. The Mohegan Tribe and, through the Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority, the Mohegan Sun Casino, are not subject to suit unless the United States Congress has unequivocally abrogated tribal sovereign immunity or the Mohegan Tribe itself has clearly expressed a waiver of its immunity in a specific forum. See Kiowa Tribe of Oklahoma v. Mfg. Technologies, Inc., 523 U.S. 751 at 754; Kizis v. Morse Diesel Intern., Inc., 260 Conn. at 55. The Plaintiff, Elizabeth Tremblay, is a former employee of the Defendant tribe. She brought this lawsuit against the Defendant under a theory of employment discrimination. However, rather than bringing her claims in the Mohegan Gaming Disputes Court, where the Defendant s sovereign immunity has been waived for discrimination claims by employees against the Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority, she filed the instant lawsuit in federal court. The District Court properly recognized that tribal sovereign immunity shielded the Defendant from suit in federal court and deprived the District Court of subject matter jurisdiction to 6
12 Case , Document 43, 11/03/2014, , Page 12 of 21 adjudicate the Plaintiff s Complaint. The Plaintiff has failed to establish either an abrogation or a waiver of immunity that would permit her suit against the Defendant to be adjudicated in federal court. Accordingly, the District Court properly dismissed the Plaintiff s employment lawsuit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction based on sovereign immunity. ARGUMENT I. THE DISTRICT COURT PROPERLY GRANTED THE DEFENDANT S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION BECAUSE THE PLAINTIFF S COMPLAINT ALLEGING EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION AGAINST HER FORMER TRIBAL EMPLOYER WAS BARRED BY SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY A. Standard of Review Fed. R.Civ. Pro. 12(b)(1) permits a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. A case is properly dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) when the court lacks the statutory or constitutional power to adjudicate it. Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1); Makarova v. United States, 201 F.3d 110, 113 (2d Cir.2000). Plaintiff, as the party asserting subject matter jurisdiction, has the burden of establishing that it exists, Malik v. Meissner, 82 F.3d 560, 562 (2d Cir.1996) (citation omitted), and the Court should not draw argumentative inferences in her favor. Atl. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Balfour Maclaine Int'l, 968 F.2d 196, 198 (2d Cir.1992) (citation omitted). When considering a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, the court must determine whether or not the factual predicate for subject matter exists. Tilley v. Anixter Inc., 283 F.Supp.2d 729, 733 (D.Conn.2003) (citation omitted). Rzayeva v. U.S., 492 F.Supp.2d 60, 70 (D.Conn. 2007). 7
13 Case , Document 43, 11/03/2014, , Page 13 of 21 We review the district court's decision on a motion to dismiss under FRCP 12(b)(6) or 12(b)(1) de novo...when considering a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1), the court must take all facts alleged in the complaint as true and draw all reasonable inferences in favor of plaintiff... Dismissal is inappropriate unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts which would entitle him or her to relief. Sweet v. Sheehan, 235 F3d 80, 83 (2000). In adjudicating a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Rule 12(b)(1), courts may consider evidence outside the pleadings. Makarova v. United States, 201 F.3d 110, 113 (2d Cir. 2000). B. The District Court Correctly Determined That The Mohegan Tribe Of Indians Of Connecticut Is A Federally-Recognized Indian Tribe As the District Court correctly found, the Mohegan Tribe of Indians of Connecticut (the Mohegan Tribe ) is a federally recognized Indian tribe. See Mohegan Land Claims Settlement Act, 25 U.S. C. 1775(a) et seq; see also 59 Fed. Reg. 12, (1994) as modified by 59 Fed. Reg (final determination that the Mohegan Indian Tribe of Connecticut does exist as an Indian Tribe); see also, Kizis v. Morse Diesel Intern., Inc., 260 Conn. 46, 55, 794 A.2d 498 (Conn. 2002)(Mohegan Tribe is recognized by an act of Congress and by the state of Connecticut); Beecher v. Mohegan Tribe of Indians of Connecticut, 282 Conn. 130, 918 A.2d 880 (2007). 8
14 Case , Document 43, 11/03/2014, , Page 14 of 21 The Mohegan Tribe, as a federally-recognized tribe, is a sovereign entity and immune from unconsented suit. Kizis, supra; Beecher, supra; Native American Mohegans v. United States, 184 F.Supp. 2d 198 (D.Conn. 2002). It is by now well established that Indian tribes possess the common-law immunity from suit traditionally enjoyed by sovereign powers. See, e.g., Oklahoma Tax Comm. v. Citizen Band Potawatomi Indian Tribe, 498 U.S. 505, 509 (1991); United States v. United States Fidelity & Guar. Co., 309 U.S. 506, 512 (1940). Bassett v. Mashantucket Pequot Tribe, 204 F.3d 343, 356 (2d Cir. 2000). This immunity arises from the long-standing recognition of Indian tribes as domestic dependent nations which exercise inherent sovereign authority over their members and territories, Oklahoma Tax Comm. v. Citizen Band Potawatomi Indian Tribe, supra; Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. (6 Pet.) 515 (1832), and has been recognized as predating the United States Constitution. United States v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., supra at The continued recognition of tribal sovereignty promotes and protects the federal policies of tribal self-determination, economic development, and cultural and political autonomy. See California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, 480 U.S. 202 (1987); see, generally, Felix S. Cohen, Handbook of Federal Indian Law, (1982). [I]n the absence of federal authorization, tribal immunity, like all aspects of tribal sovereignty, is privileged from diminution by the states. Three Affiliated Tribes v. 9
15 Case , Document 43, 11/03/2014, , Page 15 of 21 Wold Engineering, 476 U.S. 877, 890 (1986); see Kiowa Tribe v. Manufacturing Technologies, Inc., 523 U.S. 751, 756 (1998). These principles were recently affirmed in Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community Et Al., 572 U.S. (2014)(tribal sovereign immunity barred state suit over tribe s operation of casino off-reservation). point. The Plaintiff-Appellant does not contest the District Court s finding on this C. The District Court Correctly Determined That The Mohegan Tribe s Sovereign Immunity Applies To The Mohegan Sun Casino The District Court also held that the Mohegan Tribe operates the defendant Mohegan Sun Casino through the Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority (MTGA). This was consistent with the Connecticut Supreme Court s decision in Kizis: The tribe created the authority to facilitate and act as the governmental entity responsible for managing all aspects of the tribe's gaming enterprises. This was accomplished under the authority of Article XIII, 1, of the Constitution of the Mohegan Tribe of Indians of Connecticut, which provides in relevant part: "Creation of Gaming Authority. All governmental and proprietary powers of The Mohegan Tribe over the development, construction, operation, promotion, financing, regulation and licensing of gaming, and any associated hotel, associated resort or associated entertainment facilities, on tribal lands (collectively, 'Gaming') shall be exercised by the Tribal Gaming Authority, provided that such powers shall be within the scope of authority delegated by the Tribal Council to the Tribal Gaming Authority under the ordinance establishing the Tribal Gaming Authority..." Kizis, supra, 260 Conn. at 48, n.1. 10
16 Case , Document 43, 11/03/2014, , Page 16 of 21 The MTGA is cloaked with the sovereign immunity of the Mohegan Tribe. Id., 260 Conn. at 58. Thus, any claim or process against the MTGA, i.e., Mohegan Sun, is barred to the same extent as if brought against the Mohegan Tribe itself. 1 Again, Plaintiff-Appellant has not challenged this aspect of the District Court decision. D. The District Court Correctly Determined That Neither Title VII Nor The ADEA Abrogates The Defendant s Sovereign Immunity The District Court correctly held that the Mohegan Tribe has not waived its immunity from suits in federal court, and Title VII of the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq., one of the statutes upon which Plaintiff relies, is expressly inapplicable to Indian tribes. See 42 U.S.C. 2000e(b) (excluding Indian tribes from the definition of employers covered by the Act). Accordingly, when a complaint is brought before the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EEOC), the entity having jurisdiction over most employment-discrimination claims, if the respondent employer is an Indian Tribe, the EEOC has no jurisdiction over the matter and the action must be dismissed, as the EEOC did here. EEOC v. The Cherokee Nation, 871 F.2d 937 (10th Cir. 1989). 1 The MTGA does business as Mohegan Sun. See Kizis, 260 Conn. at (equating Mohegan Sun with the Authority). 11
17 Case , Document 43, 11/03/2014, , Page 17 of 21 While the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. 621, et seq. does not expressly exclude Indian tribal employers from coverage, the law does not abrogate tribal sovereign immunity from private lawsuits. See, Garcia v. Akwesasne Housing Authority, 268 F.3d 76, 86 (2nd Cir. 2001). Thus, claims against Indian tribal employers under the ADEA are barred by sovereign immunity. The District Court correctly found that Plaintiff-Appellant may not bring claims of employment discrimination against an Indian tribal employer under Title VII or the ADEA in federal court. The Plaintiff does not challenge that decision. E. The Mohegan Tribe Has Enacted Legislation Authorizing The Assertion Of Employment Discrimination Claims, But Only In Tribal Court The District Court also noted that the Mohegan Tribe has adopted legislation establishing a tribal court system, the Gaming Disputes Court and the Gaming Disputes Court of Appeals, and also has enacted legislation waiving the sovereign immunity of the Tribe and the Gaming Authority for the assertion of discrimination claims by employees against the MTGA. However, that waiver only permits employment discrimination claims against the MTGA to be brought in the Gaming Disputes Court. The federal courts lack jurisdiction over Plaintiff- Appellant s claims of employment discrimination. The District Court correctly concluded that the [P]laintiff s only remedy is to proceed in [the Mohegan 12
18 Case , Document 43, 11/03/2014, , Page 18 of 21 Gaming Disputes Court] and dismissed Plaintiff-Appellant s federal lawsuit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Plaintiff-Appellant s brief does not challenge that decision. F. Plaintiff-Appellant s Brief Fails To Raise Any Cognizable Claims On Appeal As Plaintiff-Appellant is proceeding pro se, considerable leeway may be afforded so that technical defects in her pleadings may be overlooked. See Makarova v. United States, 201 F.3d 110, 113 (2 nd Cir. 2000). However, the Plaintiff-Appellant s principal brief offers absolutely no basis for reversal of the District Court s decision. The Plaintiff s assertions in her brief do not challenge the District Court s essential holding that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the case. Instead, she asserts her continued disagreement with the Defendant s termination of her employment in December She asserts that she was discharged for being rude to a customer, and she disagrees with that assessment. As the District Court properly noted, the forum for raising this claim was in the Mohegan Gaming Disputes Court. Had she brought a timely complaint in that Court, these factual issues might have been subject to adjudication (assuming that her claims adequately alleged a form of employment discrimination cognizable under Mohegan law). However, the Plaintiff s claims cannot be adjudicated in 13
19 Case , Document 43, 11/03/2014, , Page 19 of 21 federal court because, as the District Court properly concluded, that court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. The District Court properly dismissed Plaintiff-Appellant s lawsuit for lack of subject matter jurisdiction based on sovereign immunity. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reason, the District Court s Judgment of Dismissal should be affirmed. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE, THE MOHEGAN SUN CASINO By: /s/ Proloy K. Das PROLOY K. DAS, ESQ. ANDREW L. HOULDING, ESQ. ROME MCGUIGAN, P.C. One State Street Hartford, CT Tel: 860/ Fax: 860/ pdas@rms-law.com 14
20 Case , Document 43, 11/03/2014, , Page 20 of 21 CERTIFICATION PER FED. R. APP. P. 32(a)(7)(c) Certificate of Compliance with Type-Volume Limitation, Typeface Requirements and Type style Requirements 1. This brief complies with the type-volume limitation of Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(7)(B) because this brief contains 2,852 words, as calculated by the word processing system used to prepare it, excluding the parts of the brief exempted by Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(7)(B)(iii). 2. This brief complies with the typeface requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(5) and the type style requirements of Fed. R. App. P. 32(a)(6) because this brief has been prepared in a proportionally spaced typeface using Microsoft Word 2010 in 14 point Times New Roman. Dated: November 3, 2014 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE, MOHEGAN SUN CASINO By: /s/ Proloy K. Das PROLOY K. DAS, ESQ. ANDREW L. HOULDING, ESQ. ROME MCGUIGAN, P.C. One State Street Hartford, CT Tel: 860/ Fax: 860/
21 Case , Document 43, 11/03/2014, , Page 21 of 21 CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE I hereby certify that two copies of DEFENDANT-APPELLEE, MOHEGAN SUN CASINO S BRIEF was mailed, postage prepaid, this 3 rd day of November, 2014, to all counsel and pro se parties of records as follows: Elizabeth Tremblay, pro se 423 Rixtown Road Griswold, CT By: /s/ Proloy K. Das PROLOY K. DAS, ESQ. I also certify that the original and five copies were hand-delivered to: Clerk of the Court United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit United States Courthouse 500 Pearl Street, 3 rd Floor New York, NY (212) On this 3 rd day of November By: /s/ Proloy K. Das PROLOY K. DAS, ESQ. 16
Case3:11-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 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 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 informationUNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD. and Case No. 34-RC-2230 PETITION TO REVOKE SUBPOENA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD FOXWOODS RESORT CASINO and Case No. 34-RC-2230 INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE, AEROSPACE & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA
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 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 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 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 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 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 informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
Appellate Case: 12-5136 Document: 01019118132 Date Filed: 08/30/2013 Page: 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT STATE OF OKLAHOMA, ) ) Appellee/Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. 12-5134 &
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 1:12-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 informationNo IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT. Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation, et al.
Appellate Case: 18-4013 Document: 010110021345 Date Filed: 07/11/2018 Page: 1 No. 18-4013 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation,
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN ELTON LOUIS, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 08-C-558 STOCKBRIDGE-MUNSEE COMMUNITY, Defendant. DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff Elton Louis filed this action
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 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 2:05-cr LHT-DLH Document 33 Filed 11/01/2007 Page 1 of 6
Case 2:05-cr-00005-LHT-DLH Document 33 Filed 11/01/2007 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA BRYSON CITY DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) Plaintiff,
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 informationCase 2:17-cv JMA-SIL Document 13 Filed 02/07/19 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 73
Case 2:17-cv-05869-JMA-SIL Document 13 Filed 02/07/19 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 73 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ----------------------------------------------------------------X
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 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 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 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 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 informationCase 5:07-cv VAP-JCR Document 29 Filed 02/18/2008 Page 1 of 11
Case :0-cv-0-VAP-JCR Document Filed 0//00 Page of 0 0 LESTER J. MARSTON - California State Bar No. 000 E-mail: marston@pacbell.net RAPPORT AND MARSTON 0 West Perkins Street P.O. Box Ukiah, CA Telephone:
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 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 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 informationNUMBER: CC IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
Case: 15-13552 Date Filed: 05/04/2016 Page: 1 of 35 NUMBER: 15-13552-CC IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT CHRISTINE WILLIAMS, v. Plaintiff-Appellant, POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS,
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 informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA PLAINTIFF S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT S MOTION TO DISMISS
Case 4:10-cv-00371-GKF-TLW Document 15 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 09/07/10 Page 1 of 16 (1) SPECIALTY HOUSE OF CREATION, INCORPORATED, a New Jersey corporation, Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN
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 informationREPLY BRIEF OF APPELLANTS
Case: 15-36003, 09/19/2016, ID: 10127799, DktEntry: 26, Page 1 of 14 Docket No. 15-36003 In the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit GLENN EAGLEMAN, et al. Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. ROCKY
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 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 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 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 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 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 DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Applicant, v. Case No. 13-MC-61 FOREST COUNTY POTAWATOMI COMMUNITY, d/b/a Potawatomi Bingo Casino, Respondent.
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 informationDocket No.: CC UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT CHRISTINE WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS,
Case: 15-13552 Date Filed: 06/20/2016 Page: 1 of 41 Docket No.: 15-13552-CC UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT CHRISTINE WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant v. POARCH BAND OF CREEK INDIANS,
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 1:17-cv RGA Document 18 Filed 08/15/17 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 171. x : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : APPELLANT S REPLY BRIEF
Case 117-cv-00319-RGA Document 18 Filed 08/15/17 Page 1 of 14 PageID # 171 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE -------------------------------------------------------------- In re
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 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 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 informationCase 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 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 informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case 5:08-cv-00429-D Document 64 Filed 10/16/2009 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA TINA MARIE SOMERLOTT, ) ) PLAINTIFF, ) ) V. ) ) ) CHEROKEE NATION DISTRIBUTORS,
More informationIn the Supreme Court of the United States
No. 12-515 In the Supreme Court of the United States STATE OF MICHIGAN, PETITIONER v. BAY MILLS INDIAN COMMUNITY, ET AL. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
More information6:14-cv KEW Document 26 Filed in ED/OK on 06/17/14 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
6:14-cv-00182-KEW Document 26 Filed in ED/OK on 06/17/14 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA (1) CHOCTAW NATION OF ) OKLAHOMA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Case
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 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 informationRESPONSE REGARDING MOTION TO AMEND COMPLAINT AND JOIN ADDITIONAL PARTIES
Case 1:10-cv-01273-PLM Doc #71 Filed 07/29/11 Page 1 of 15 Page ID#1416 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff, v. BAY MILLS INDIAN COMMUNITY,
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 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 informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT. No ANNETTE NAWLS and ADRIAN NAWLS, vs.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT No. 16-1636 ANNETTE NAWLS and ADRIAN NAWLS, vs. Plaintiffs - Appellants, SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY GAMING ENTERPRISE MYSTIC LAKE
More informationNo UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff-Appellee, CHARLES D.
Appellate Case: 17-4059 Document: 01019889341 01019889684 Date Filed: 10/23/2017 Page: 1 No. 17-4059 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff-Appellee,
More informationIN THE CHEUNG YIN SUN, LONG MEI FANG, ZONG YANG LI,
16-1008 FILED JAN 3-,201,7 IN THE CHEUNG YIN SUN, LONG MEI FANG, ZONG YANG LI, Petitioners, MASHANTUCKET PEQUOT GAMING ENTERPRISE, Individually, d/b/a FOXWOODS RESORT CASINO, ANNE CHEN, Individually, JEFF
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA BRYSON CITY DIVISION. CIVIL CASE NO.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA BRYSON CITY DIVISION CIVIL CASE NO. 2:10cv08 BETTY MADEWELL AND ) EDWARD L. MADEWELL, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) O R
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 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 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 information15-20-CV FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. ALLCO FINANCE LIMITED Plaintiff-Appellant
15-20-CV To Be Argued By: ROBERT D. SNOOK Assistant Attorney General IN THE United States Court of Appeals FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT ALLCO FINANCE LIMITED Plaintiff-Appellant v. ROBERT KLEE, in his Official
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 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 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 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 informationCase 1:14-cv AWI-SMS Document 18 Filed 11/17/14 Page 1 of 12
Case :-cv-00-awi-sms Document Filed // Page of 0 GEORGE W. MULL, State Bar No. LAW OFFICE OF GEORGE W. MULL th Street, Suite 0 Sacramento, CA Telephone: () -000 Facsimile: () - Email: george@georgemull.com
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 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 informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL THIRD DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA. Appellant, Case No. 3D L.T. Case No CA-21856
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL THIRD DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA RECEIVED, 9/7/2017 10:15 AM, Mary Cay Blanks, Third District Court of Appeal THE MICCOSUKEE TRIBE OF INDIANS OF FLORIDA, vs. Appellant,
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 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 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 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 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 informationNo IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT. Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation, et al.
Appellate Case: 16-4154 Document: 01019730944 Date Filed: 12/05/2016 Page: 1 No. 16-4154 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation,
More informationCase 1:15-cv JAP-CG Document 110 Filed 01/12/16 Page 1 of 11
Case 1:15-cv-00501-JAP-CG Document 110 Filed 01/12/16 Page 1 of 11 Ethel B. Branch, Attorney General The Navajo Nation Paul Spruhan, Assistant Attorney General NAVAJO NATION DEPT. OF JUSTICE Post Office
More informationDEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS. Defendants PCI Gaming d/b/a Creek Entertainment Center; Wind Creek Casino & Hotel;
ELECTRONICALLY FILED 6/21/2013 3:11 PM 30-CV-2013-900081.00 CIRCUIT COURT OF ESCAMBIA COUNTY, ALABAMA JOHN FOUNTAIN, CLERK IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR ESCAMBIA COUNTY, ALABAMA AMANDA HARRISON, as mother and
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 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 In The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Appellate Case: 15-6117 Document: 01019504579 Date Filed: 10/08/2015 Page: 1 No. 15-6117 In The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit UNITED PLANNERS FINANCIAL SERVICES OF AMERICA, LP, Plaintiff-Appellant,
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 informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
CASE 0:15-cv-02769-ADM-HB Document 33 Filed 02/05/16 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Annette Nawls and Adrian Nawls, vs. Plaintiffs, Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community
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 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 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 informationTHE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case :-cv-00-btm-bgs Document Filed 0// Page of 0 0 Mark H. Plager (Bar No., mark@plagerschack.com PLAGER SHACK, LLP Beach Boulevard, Suite 0 Huntington Beach, CA ( -00 - Telephone ( -00 Facsimile Attorney
More informationz ID Case 2:09-cv DAD Document 8 Filed 05/22/09 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Case 2:9-cv-742-DAD Document 8 Filed 5/22/9 Page 1 of 12 Clement J. Kong, Esq. (State Bar No. 6984) Jill C. Peterson, Esq. (State Bar No. 12963) KORSHAK, KRACOFF, KONG & SUGANO, LLP 243
More informationSupreme Court of the Unitd Statee
No. 12-1237 IN THE Supreme Court of the Unitd Statee FILED MAY 1 3 20~ OFFICE OF THE CLERK DANIEL T. MILLER; AMBER LANPHERE; PAUL M. MATHESON, Petitioners, Vo CHAD WRIGHT, PUYALLUP TRIBE TAX DEPARTMENT,
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 informationNo. 08- IN TH~OFIRCE OF THE. (ggurt gf [nitdl. COUSHATTA TRIBE OF LOUISIANA, Petitioner, MEYER & ASSOCIATES, INC. and RICHARD MEYER, Respondents.
~gpreme Court, ~LED No. 08- IN TH~OFIRCE OF THE (ggurt gf [nitdl COUSHATTA TRIBE OF LOUISIANA, Petitioner, MEYER & ASSOCIATES, INC. and RICHARD MEYER, Respondents. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case :-cv-00-vap-kk Document - Filed 0/0/ Page of Page ID #:0 0 George Forman (SBN 0 Kimberly A. Cluff (SBN Jay B. Shapiro (SBN 00 Jeffrey R. Keohane (SBN 00 FORMAN & ASSOCIATES 0 Redwood Highway, Suite
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 informationMARTHA L. KING 1900 Plaza Drive Louisville, CO Telephone: (303) Direct: (303) Fax: (303)
Appellate Case: 13-6117 Document: 01019133581 Date Filed: 09/27/2013 Page: 1 MARTHA L. KING 1900 Plaza Drive Louisville, CO 80027 Telephone: (303) 673-9600 Direct: (303) 815-1712 Fax: (303) 673-9155 E-Mail:
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN GREEN BAY DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN GREEN BAY DIVISION Oneida Nation, Plaintiff v. Village of Hobart, Wisconsin, Case No. Defendant. MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF
More information