Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
- Law360
- Law360 UK
- Law360 Pulse
- Law360 Employment Authority
- Law360 Tax Authority
- Law360 Insurance Authority
- Law360 Real Estate Authority
- Law360 Healthcare Authority
- Law360 Bankruptcy Authority
- Products
- Lexis®
- Law360 In-Depth
- Law360 Podcasts
- Rankings
- Leaderboard Analytics
- Regional Powerhouses
- Law360's MVPs
- Women in Law Report
- Law360 400
- Diversity Snapshot
- Practice Groups of the Year
- Rising Stars
- Titans of the Plaintiffs Bar
- Sections
- Adv. Search & Platform Tools
- About all sections
- Browse all sections
- Banking
- Bankruptcy
- Class Action
- Competition
- Employment
- Energy
- Expert Analysis
- Insurance
- Intellectual Property
- Product Liability
- Securities
- Beta Tools
- Track docs
- Track attorneys
- Track judges
PICAYUNE RANCHERIA OF THE CHUKCHANSI INDIANS v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
Case Number:
1:12-cv-02071
Court:
Nature of Suit:
Judge:
Firms
Government Agencies
-
September 09, 2016
4 Takeaways From DOI's Win In Calif. Tribal Casino Row
A federal court's recent rejection of a challenge to a casino the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians plans to build in Northern California endorsed both the U.S. Department of the Interior's approach to taking land into trust for gambling projects and a broad interpretation of a controversial U.S. Supreme Court ruling from 2009. Here are four key takeaways from the DOI and North Fork tribe's win.
-
April 23, 2015
BIA Defends Taking Calif. Tribe's Casino Land Into Trust
The U.S. Department of the Interior urged a D.C. federal judge Wednesday to find valid two Bureau of Indian Affairs decisions allowing the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians' casino project in California to proceed, arguing that a rival tribe hadn't shown the government couldn't take land for the project into trust.
-
March 17, 2015
Calif. Tribe Says Rival's Casino Project Must Start Over
The Picayune Rancheria of the Chukchansi Indians asked a D.C. federal judge Monday to set aside two Bureau of Indian Affairs decisions allowing another tribe's casino project to go forward, arguing that the rival tribe's gaming agreement with the state was never made valid.