Appeal No. A12-1324 STATE OF MINNESOTA IN ...

[Pages:81]Appeal No. A12-1324 STATE OF MINNESOTA

IN SUPREME COURT _________________________________________________________________

City of Duluth,

Respondent,

v.

Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa,

Appellant. _________________________________________________________________

Appellant Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa's Brief And Addendum

________________________________________________________________

Attorneys for Respondent:

Attorneys for Appellant:

M. Alison Lutterman (#017676X) Deputy City Attorney Nathan N. LaCoursiere (#0388349) Assistant City Attorney CITY OF DULUTH Suite 410 City Hall 411 W. First Street Duluth, MN 55802 Ph. (218) 730-5490

Henry M. Buffalo Jr. (#0236603) BUFFALO LAW OFFICE, P.C. 11370 Panama Ave S Hastings, MN 55033 Ph. (651) 398-7113

Douglas B. L. Endreson, pro hac vice Donald J. Simon, pro hac vice Anne D. Noto, pro hac vice SONOSKY, CHAMBERS, SACHSE, ENDRESON & PERRY, LLP 1425 K Street, N.W. Suite 600 Washington, DC 20005 Ph. (202) 682-0240

August 26, 2013

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES..............................................................................................iii STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE .......................................................................................... 1 STATEMENT OF THE CASE ........................................................................................... 2 STATEMENT OF FACTS .................................................................................................. 3

The 1986 Agreements............................................................................................... 4 The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act ......................................................................... 5 The resulting illegality of the 1986 agreements ....................................................... 6 The 1994 Agreements............................................................................................... 7 The recent and pending federal litigation............................................................... 10 The pending federal administrative proceeding ..................................................... 12 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT......................................................................................... 14 ARGUMENT..................................................................................................................... 16 I. The Standard of Review Is De Novo ........................................................... 16 II. The State Court Has No Jurisdiction Because Whether the Bands

1986 Waiver of Immunity Is Effective Turns on the Interpretation of the 1994 Amendments, Which Is Committed Exclusively to Federal Court ............................................................................................................ 16 A. Absent an effective waiver, the Band is immune from suit ............. 17 B. The Bands 1994 waiver of immunity is limited to actions in

federal court, as confirmed by the additional forum selection provisions in the 1994 Umbrella Agreement ................................... 20 C. This case presents a threshold dispute over the application of the 1994 dormancy clause to the 1986 waiver, which must be decided by the federal court ............................................................. 22

i

D. The Court should give effect to the forum selection provisions of the 1994 Umbrella Agreement as a matter of state law ............... 25

E. The Court should give effect to the forum selection provisions of the 1994 Umbrella Agreement under jurisdictional principles of federal Indian law........................................................ 28

F. The Court of Appeals erred in "interpreting the 1994 agreements" ...................................................................................... 32

III. The State Court Has No Jurisdiction Because the Bands 1986 Waiver of Immunity Is Dormant and Only the 1994 Waiver of Immunity Is in Effect, So the Band Is Subject to Suit Only in Federal Court ............................................................................................................ 33

A. The "pertain[s] to" condition of the dormancy clause is satisfied............................................................................................. 34

B. The Sublease condition of the dormancy clause is satisfied ............ 38

IV. Principles of Comity and the Orderly Administration of Justice Are Served by Allowing the Current Dispute to be Addressed in the Pending Federal Administrative and Judicial Proceedings ......................... 40

A. The principles of comity .................................................................. 41

B. This suit should be dismissed to allow the issues to be addressed in the on-going federal administrative proceeding.......... 43

C. Principles of comity also support dismissal of this suit in favor of the pending federal litigation.............................................. 46

CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................. 48

ADDENDUM

Court of Appeals Opinion, April 15, 2013, File No. A12-1324 .......... Addendum 1

District Court for the Sixth Judicial District Order and Memorandum, May 23, 2012, File No. 69DU-CV-12-857 .................................... Addendum 12

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

ii

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

CASES

Page(s)

Ainbinder v. Potter, 282 F. Supp. 2d 180 (S.D.N.Y. 2003) .............................................. 23

Alpha Real Estate Co. of Rochester v. Delta Dental Plan of Minn., 671 N.W.2d 213 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003) ........................................................................ 40

Alpha Sys. Integration, Inc. v. Silicon Graphics, Inc., 646 N.W.2d 904 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002) ........................................................................ 27

Am. Indian Agric. Credit Consortium, Inc. v. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, 780 F.2d 1374 (8th Cir. 1985) ........................................................................................ 18

Atascadero State Hosp. v. Scanlon, 473 U.S. 234 (1985), superseded on other grounds by statute as noted in Lane v. Pena, 518 U.S. 187 (1996) ....................................................................................................... 19

Bank Midwest, Minn., Iowa, N.A. v. Lipetzky, 674 N.W.2d 176 (Minn. 2004) ................ 36

Bryan v. Itasca Cnty., 426 U.S. 373 (1976) ...................................................... 2, 28, 29, 30

C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. v. FLS Transp., Inc., 772 N.W.2d 528 (Minn. Ct. App. 2009)......................................................................... 27

Carcieri v. Salazar, 555 U.S. 379 (2009) .......................................................................... 43

City of Duluth v. Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, 702 F.3d 1147 (8th Cir. 2013) (Duluth III) .................................................. 4, 6, 7, 10, 11

City of Duluth v. Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, 708 F. Supp. 2d 890 (D. Minn. 2010) (Duluth I) ................................... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

City of Duluth v. Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, 830 F. Supp. 2d 712 (D. Minn. 2011) (Duluth II) ................................................ 4, 10, 11

Cohen v. Little Six, Inc., 543 N.W.2d 376 (Minn. App. 1996) aff'd, 561 N.W.2d 889 (Minn. 1997) .............................................................................. 29

Colombe v. Rosebud Sioux Tribe, 835 F. Supp. 2d 736 (D.S.D. 2011) ............................ 19

iii

Commander Oil Corp. v. Advance Food Serv. Equip., 991 F.2d 49 (2d Cir. 1993) ............................................................................................. 23

Dacotah Props.-Richfield, Inc. v. Prairie Island Cmty., 520 N.W.2d 167 (Minn. Ct. App. 1994) ........................................................................ 19

Eagan Econ. Dev. Auth. v. U-Haul Co. of Minnesota, 787 N.W.2d 523, 530 (Minn. 2010) ................................................................................. 8

Garcia v. Akwesasne Hous. Auth., 268 F.3d 76 (2d Cir. 2001) ........................................ 19 Gavle v. Little Six, Inc., 555 N.W.2d 284 (Minn. 1996) ................................. 18, 29, 30, 31 Green Tree Acceptance, Inc. v. Midwest Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n of Minneapolis,

433 N.W.2d 140 (Minn. Ct. App. 1988) ............................................................ 41, 42, 45 Hauenstein & Bermeister, Inc. v. Met-Fab Indus., Inc.,

320 N.W.2d 886 (Minn. 1982) ....................................................................... 2, 14, 26, 27 In re Welfare of J.R., Jr., 655 N.W.2d 1 (Minn. 2003) ..................................................... 16 Interfund Corp. v. O'Byrne, 462 N.W.2d 86 (Minn. Ct. App. 1990) ................................ 27 Kansas v. N. Plains Reg'l Dir., Bureau of Indian Affairs, 36 IBIA 152 (2001) ............... 44 Kiowa Tribe of Okla. v. Mfg. Techs., Inc., 523 U.S. 751 (1998)............................. 2, 17, 18 Merit Mgmt. Grp. v. Ponca Tribe of Indians of Okla.,

778 F. Supp. 2d 916 (N.D. Ill. 2011).............................................................................. 19 Mo. River Servs., Inc. v. Omaha Tribe of Neb., 267 F.3d 848 (8th Cir. 2001) ............. 2, 18 Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians v. Patchak,

132 S. Ct. 2199 (2012).............................................................................................. 13, 43 Montana v. Blackfeet Tribe of Indians, 471 U.S. 759 (1985) ........................................... 28 Namekagon Dev. Co. v. Bois Forte Reservation Hous. Auth.,

517 F.2d 508 (8th Cir. 1975) .................................................................................... 18, 19 Oglala Sioux Tribe v. C & W Enters., 542 F.3d 224 (8th Cir. 2008) ................................ 18

iv

Okla. Tax Comm'n v. Citizen Band of Potawatomi Indian Tribe of Okla., 498 U.S. 505 (1991) ................................................................................................. 17, 18

Oneida Indian Nation v. Cnty. of Oneida, 414 U.S. 661 (1974) ....................................... 28 Orthmann v. Apple River Campground, Inc., 765 F.2d 119 (8th Cir. 1985) ........ 41, 42, 47 Pennhurst State Sch. & Hosp. v. Halderman, 465 U.S. 89 (1984) ................................... 19 P. R. Aqueduct & Sewer Auth. v. Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., 506 U.S. 139 (1993) ................. 17 Puyallup Tribe, Inc. v. Dep't of Game, 433 U.S 165 (1977) ...................................... 17, 18 Ramey Const. Co. v. Apache Tribe of Mescalero Reservation,

673 F.2d 315 (10th Cir. 1982) ........................................................................................ 18 Rice v. Olson, 324 U.S. 786 (1945) ................................................................................... 28 Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S. 49 (1978) ................................................. 17, 18 Savela v. City of Duluth, 806 N.W.2d 793 (Minn. 2011).................................................. 36 Seminole Tribe of Fla. v. Florida, 517 U.S. 44 (1996) ............................................... 17, 28 Smisek v. Comm'r of Pub. Safety, 400 N.W.2d 766 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987) ....................... 8 Sossamon v. Texas, 131 S. Ct. 1651 (2011) ...................................................................... 19 South Dakota v. U.S. Dept. of Interior, 787 F.Supp. 2d 981 (D.S.D. 2011) ............... 43, 44 St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Tennefos Constr. Co.,

396 F.2d 623 (8th Cir. 1968) .......................................................................................... 23 Three Affiliated Tribes of Fort Berthold Reservation v. Wold,

476 U.S. 877 (1986) ....................................................................................................... 17 Thurston Cnty. v. Great Plains Reg'l Dir., Bureau of Indian Affairs,

56 IBIA 296 (2013) ........................................................................................................ 44 Tibbetts v. Leech Lake Reservation Bus. Comm.,

397 N.W.2d 883 (Minn. 1986) ................................................................................. 17, 18 Tischer v. Hous. & Redevelopment Auth., 693 N.W.2d 426 (Minn. 2005)....................... 16

v

Union Elec. Co. v. Energy Ins. Mut. Ltd., 689 F.3d 968 (8th Cir. 2012) .......................... 27

Vann v. Salazar, 883 F. Supp. 2d 44 (D.D.C. 2011) rev'd on other grounds, 701 F.3d 927 (D.C. Cir. 2012) ................................................ 19

Vill. of Hobart v. Acting Midwest Reg'l Dir., Bureau of Indian Affairs, 57 IBIA 4 (2013) ............................................................................................................ 44

Williams v. Lee, 358 U.S. 217 (1959)................................................................................ 31

Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. (6 Pet.) 515 (1832) ........................................................... 28

STATUTES, RULES AND REGULATIONS

25 U.S.C. ?465 ........................................................................................................ 5, 12, 13

25 U.S.C. ?467 .................................................................................................................... 5

Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), 25 U.S.C. ??2701-2721...................................... 5 25 U.S.C. ?2702(1)........................................................................................................... 5 25 U.S.C. ?2702(3)........................................................................................................... 6 25 U.S.C. ?2703(7)........................................................................................................... 6 25 U.S.C. ?2703(8)........................................................................................................... 6 25 U.S.C. ?2710(a) ........................................................................................................... 6 25 U.S.C. ?2710(b)(2)(A)................................................................................................. 6 25 U.S.C. ?2710(d)........................................................................................................... 6 25 U.S.C. ?2712 ........................................................................................................... 5, 6 25 U.S.C. ?2713 ............................................................................................................... 6

28 U.S.C. ?1360 ................................................................................................................ 28

25 C.F.R. pt. 151.......................................................................................................... 12, 43 25 C.F.R. ?151.10..................................................................................................... 13, 43 25 C.F.R. ?151.12(a) ................................................................................................ 13, 43 25 C.F.R. ?151.12(b) ................................................................................................ 13, 43

Land Acquisitions, 61 Fed. Reg. 18,082 (Apr. 24, 1996) ................................................. 43

Land Acquisitions, 78 Fed. Reg. 32,214 (May 29, 2013) ........................................... 13, 43

FED. R. CIV. P. 60(b).......................................................................................................... 10

vi

MINN. R. EVID. 201.............................................................................................................. 8 MINN. R. CIV. P. 19.2 ........................................................................................................ 45 OTHER AUTHORITIES WEBSTERS NEW UNIVERSAL UNABRIDGED DICTIONARY (1996).................................... 36 BLACKS LAW DICTIONARY (9th ed. 2009) ....................................................................... 36

vii

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download