Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Stop The Casino 101 Coalition v. Brown

California Court of Appeals, First District, Third Division

October 3, 2014

STOP THE CASINO 101 COALITION et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants,
v.
EDMUND G. BROWN, JR., as Governor, etc., Defendant and Respondent.

[As Modified October 16, 2014]

Sonoma County Super. Ct. No. SCV-251712

Page 281

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 282

COUNSEL

Slote, Links & Boreman, Robert D. Links, Marglyn E. Paseka, Michael T. Healy and Bruce A. Mirolglio for Plaintiffs and Appellants.

Minh C. Tran, Napa County Counsel, for County of Napa, City of American Canyon, Napa County Farm Bureau, Napa Valley Grapegrowers, and Napa Valley Winegrowers as Amici Curiae on behalf of plaintiffs and appellants.

Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Sara J. Drake, Assistant Attorney General, and William L. Williams, Jr., Deputy Attorney General, for Defendant and Respondent.

OPINION

POLLAK, ACTING P.J.

Stop the Casino 101 Coalition, an unincorporated citizen group, and three individuals (collectively, the coalition) appeal from a summary judgment rejecting their attempt to invalidate the compact between the state and the Federated Indians of the Graton Rancheria (the Graton Tribe) authorizing the operation of a gaming casino on a 254-acre parcel in and adjacent to the City of Rohnert Park. The coalition contends that because the State of California failed to explicitly cede to the Graton Tribe jurisdiction over the property, which was formerly held by private parties, federal law does not authorize the assumption of tribal jurisdiction over the property and therefore the state’s entry into the compact violates the California constitutional provision authorizing such gaming compacts. The state contends that the coalition’s claim is essentially an attack on the validity of

Page 283

action taken by the federal government that cannot be challenged in these state court proceedings, and that in all events there has been no violation of either federal or state law. We do not pass judgment on the contentious policy issues underlying the creation of Indian reservations for the purpose of constructing gaming casinos. We consider only the legal issues presented and conclude that the attack ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.