Document Actions

Cases

A. Decision on Defendants Motion to Dismiss: 12-4-07 Decision by Judge McAvoy denying Defendant's Motion to Dismiss with leave to renew
A. Complaint: Complaint filed in US District Court on June 22, 2007 to enforce Tribal Court Judgment
B. Defendants Motion to Dismiss: Defendant's Motion to Dismiss on jurisdictional grounds
C. Defendants Memorandum of Law: Defendant's Memorandum of Law in support of Motion to Dismiss
D. Opposition to Motion to Dismiss: Plaintiff's Memorandum of Law in opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss filed 9-11-07
D.1. Declaration of Chief White: Declaration of Chief Lorraine White in Support of Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
D.1.A.1 Exhibit A-1 to White Declaration: Exhibit A to Declaration of Chief White
D.1.A.2. Exhibit A-2 to White Declaration: Exhibit A-2 to Declaration of Chief Lorraine White
D.1.A.3. Exhibit A-3 to White Declaration: Exhibit A-3 to Declaration of Chief Lorraine White
D.1.B. Exhibit B to White Declaration: Exhibit B to Declaration of Chief Lorraine White
D.1.C. Exhibit C to White Declaration: Exhibit C to Declaration of Chief Lorraine White
D.2 Declaration of Chief Lazore: Declaration of Chief Barbara Lazore in Support of Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
D.2.A. Exhbit A to Lazore Declaration: Exhibit A to Declaration of chief Barbara Lazore
D.3. Declaration of Michael Rhodes Devey, Esq.: Declaration of Counsel for Plaintiffs in Tribal Court Action in Support of Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
D.3.A. Exhibit A to Rhodes Devey Declaration: Exhibit A to Declaration of Michael Rhodes-Devey, Esq.
D.4. Declaration of Dennis Vacco, Esq.: Declaration of Litigation Trustee Dennis Vacco in Support of Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
D.4.A. Exhibits A and B to Vacco Declaration: Exhibits A and B to Declaration of Dennis Vacco
D.4.C. Exhibit C to Vacco Declaration: Exhibit C to Declaration of Dennis Vacco, Esq.
D.5. Declaration of Rachael Ragni, Esq.: Declaration of Counsel Ragni in Support of Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
D.5.1. Exhibits 1-3 to Ragni Declaration: Exhibits 1-3 to Declaration of Rachael Ragni, Esq.
D.5.2. Exhibits 4-7 to Ragni Declaration: Exhibits 4-7 to Declaration of Rachael Ragni, Esq.
D.5.3. Exhibit 8 to Ragni Declaration: Exhibit 8 to Declaration of Racheal RAgni, Esq.
E. Reply to Opposition: Memorandum Brief of Defendant in reply to Plaintiff's Opposition to Motion to Dissmiss
E.1.1. Attorneys Declaration: Declaration of Defendant's attorney in support of reply brief
E.1.2. Exhibit A to Declaration: Exhibit A to Declaration of Defendants' Attorney in reply to Plaintiff's Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
E.1.3. Exhibit B-1 to Declaration: Exhibit B-1 to Declaration of Defendants' Attorney in reply to Plaintiff's Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
E.1.4. Exhibit B-2 to Declaration: Exhibit B-2 to Declaration of Defendants' Attorney in reply to Plaintiff's Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
E.1.5. Exhibits C-H to Declaration: Exhibits C-H to Declaration of Defendants' Attorney in reply to Plaintiff's Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
E.1.6. Exhibits I - J to Declaration: Exhibits I-J to Declaration of Defendants' Attorney in reply to Plaintiff's Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
E.1.7 Exhibits K-M to Declaration: Exhibits K-M to Declaration of Defendants' Attorney in reply to Plaintiff's Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
L. Defendants Answer: Answer filed by Defendants on December 17, 2007
Basil Cook Enterprises v. St Regis Mohawk Tribe, 117 F.3d 61; 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 15454: June 1997 decision of 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals involving alleged invalidity of St. Regis Mohawk Tribal Court
Bowen v Doyle, 880 F. Supp. 99 (1995): Exhaustion of remedies required in context of Tribal dispute involving NY Tribe
National Farmers Union Ins. v. Crow Tribe 471 U.S. 845 (1985): Supreme Court Case on Tribal Court Exhaustion Doctrine
A. Arquette v PPE - Entry of Default: Order entering default by defendants 2-01-01
B. Arquette v PPE - Default Judgment Order: Order awarding default judgment 3-20-01
C. Tribal Court Order of July 12, 2007: Order amending caption of Default Judgment Order and clarifying the rate of interest aplicable to the default judgment.
D. Herne v. Election Board: Declaratory Judgement Decision by St. Regis Mohawk Tribal Court concerning the election of Tribal Court judges
A. Judiciary Act of 1994 (TCR 94-F): Tribal Council Resolution Establishing St. Regis Mohawk Tribal Court System
B. TCR 2007-14: Judiciary Act of 2007: Tribal Council Resolution reaffirming and supplementing Judiciary Act of 1994
C.1. Investigative Report adopted by TCR-2007-14: Report to Tribal Council on an investigation of the circumstances surrounding TCR 2000-136
C.2. Exhibits A-Z to Investigative Report: Supporting documentation included in Investigative Report
C.3. Exhibits 1-23 to Investigative Report: Additional documentation included in the Investigative Report
A. Appellants Opening Brief - April 1, 2005 (Redacted): Plaintiffs Brief on Appeal to 2nd Circuit (Best viewed with Adobe Reader 7.0)
B. Appellee Reply Brief - June 9, 2005: Defendant's Reply Brief on the Appeal to the 2nd Circuit. Originally Filed Under Seal, it has been Unsealed at the Request of the Defendant.
C. Appellants Reply Brief - July 11, 2005 (Redacted): Our 2005 Reply Brief in the Appeal to the Second Circuit. Certain matters refering to information under seal has been redacted.
C.1. Supplemental Letter by Plaintiffs - September 12, 2005: Letter Advising the Court of Recently Decided Cases Under FRAP Rule 28j
C.2. Defendants Response to Supplemental Letter From Plaintiffs: Defendants Position with Respect to the Recently Decided Cases - September 18, 2005
C.3. Motion to Strike Defendant Response - October 3, 2005: Motion to Strike defendant response to Rule 28j Letter as exceeding word limit
C.3.1. Reply to Defendants Response to Supplemental Letter: Reply to Defendants 28(j) Response filed as an Alternative with Motion to Strike
C.4. Defendant Declaration in Opposition to Motion to Strike: Declaration of George Carpinello in Opposition to Motion to Strike - October 4, 2005
C.5. Plaintiff Affidavit re Motion to Strike: Affidavit of Andy Frey Supporting Motion to Strike - October 5, 2005
C.6. Supplemental Letter by Plaintiffs - March 3, 2006: Supplemental Letter Advising Court of Recent 8th Circuit Decision in Thorstenson v. Norton
C.7. Defendants Response to 3-2-06 Supplemental Letter From Plaintiffs: Defendants Response to Supplemental Letter re Thorstenson v Norton
C.8. Supplemental Letter from Defendant re Reversal in NGV Gaming.: Supplemental Letter from Defendant re Reversal by District Court in NGV Gaming
D. Appendices -See Appendices below under Category H: Four volumes of the Joint Appendix and the Special Appendix are available to Unitholders only
E. Decision of 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals on 3-08-06: Decision of 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals Remanding to District Court for Development of Record on Jurisdiction and 3rd Party Benificiaries
F. Supplemental Opening Brief for Plaintiffs-Appellants: Supplemental Brief filed by Plaintiffs on 4-5-07
G. Supplemental Reply Brief of Defendant-Appellee: Supplemental Reply Brief of Defendant-Appellee filed May 30, 2007
H. Supplemental Reply Brief for Plaintiffs-Appellants: Supplemental Reply Brief For Plaintiffs-Appellants filed June 26, 2007
E. Joint Appendix - Volume V: This Volume was Filed Under Seal.
0. Index to Joint Appendix: Index to the Joint Appendix Filed with the Briefs
A.1.2 BIA Testimony on Section 81: Testimony concerning the rationale for the amendments to Section 81.
B.2.1 NIGC Testimony on Indian Lands: Testimony of Acting NIGC General Counsel Penny Coleman to Senate Indian Affairs Committee on July 27th 2005 Concerning the Significance of Indian Lands to NIGC Juisdiction
B.2.2 BIA Testimony Concerning Land-to-trust Acquisitions: Testimony of Acting Deputy Secretary Skibine to Senate Indian Affairs Committee on July 27th 2005 Concerning Land to Tust Process
C.1 IGRA - Policy, Definitions, Authorization of Indian Gaming: 25 U.S.C. 2700 et. seq. - Selected provisions of IGRA for background
C.2 IGRA Approval and Disapproval of Management Contracts: 25 U.S.S. 2710 & 2711- Selected provisions concerning approval and disaproval of management contracts
A.1 NIGC Regulations - Definitions; Statement of Purpose: 25 USC 500 et seq. - General Regulations
A.2 NIGC Regulations - Contract Approval and Voiding: 25 CFR 533 Contract Approval and Voiding
A.3 NIGC Regulations - Definition of Managment Contract: 25 CFR 502.15
A.4 NIGC Regulations - Definition of Collateral Agreement: 25 CFR 502.5
C.1 BIA Land Acquisition Rules (1) - Open as PDF: 25 CFR 151.1 - Index; Purposes; Definitions; Policy
C.2 BIA Land Acquisition Rules (2) - Open as PDF: Sections 4 through 10
C.3 BIA Land Acquisition Rules (3) - Open as PDF: Sections 11 through 15 - Off Reservation Acquisitions
D.1. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure: Includes Rule 60(b), Which was the Basis for our Motion to Vacate the Judgement in Catskill III
D.2 Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure: Includes Rule 28(j), Which was the Basis for our Supplemental Filing Regarding Recent Cases
Memorandum of Understanding Between BIA and NIGC: BIA Authorization for NIGC Review in Land to Trust Applications for Gaming
NIGC Opinion: President RC- St Regis Management Contract: Decsription of NIGC View of Mangement Contracts and Collateral Agreements
Opinion on Mechoopda Indian Tribe of the Chico Rancheria: Recent NIGC Opinion on jurisdiction and Indian Lands
A.1 Catskill VI - Trustees of Catskill Litigation Trust v. Harrahs Operating Company: November 20, 2006 Decision and Order of Judge McMahon consolidating cases, re-instating judgment in favor of Defendant and making findings as to 3rd party beneficiaries
A.2 Catskill V - Catskill Development, et. al. v. Park Place Entertainment: November 15, 2004 Memorandum Decision of Judge McMahon Reinstating Judgment in Favor of Defendant Park Place Entertainment, Inc.
B. Catskill IV - Catskill Development, et. al. v. Park Place Entertainment (delete) (edit): October 7, 2003 Memorandum Decision by Judge McMahon Vacating Previous Judgment
C. Catskill III - Catskill Development, et. al. v. Park Place Entertainment: August 22, 2002 Decision by Judge McMahon Dismissing Contract Interference Claim and Granting Summary Judgement to Defendant on Interference with Buisness Relations
C.1 Ruling on Chief McDonalds Subpoena: May 8, 2002 Ruling by Judge McMahon Concerning Sovereign Immunity of Mohawk Tribe Official
D. Catskill II - Catskill Development, et. al. v. Park Place Entertainment: July 23, 2001 Decision by Judge McMahon Reinstating Contract Interference Claim
E. Catskill I - Catskill Development, et. al. v. Park Place Entertainment: May 14, 2001 Decision by Judge McMahon Dismissing all Claims Except Interference with Business Relations
A.1. Plaintiffs Brief on Remand: Brief filed by Plantiffs on June 1, 2006 addressing jurisdictional and 3rd party beneficiary issues identified by the 2nd Circuit
A.2. Defendant Brief on Remand: Brief filed by Defendant on June 26, 2006 addressing jurisdictional and 3rd party beneficiary issues identified by the 2nd Circuit
A.3. Plaintiffs Reply Brief on Remand from 2nd Circuit: Reply Brief filed by Plaintiffs on July 10, 2006 addressing jurisdictional and 3rd party beneficiary issues identified by the 2nd Circuit
A.4 Defendants Sur-Reply Brief: Reply Brief of Defendant to Plaintiff's Reply Brief
A.K. Mgmt. Co. v. San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, 789 F. 2d 785 (9th Cir. 1986): Precursory Agreement in Management Contract Repudiated Three Days After Signing Not Enforceable
BouncebackTechnologies.com Inc. v. Harrah's Entertainment Inc., No. 98-2058, 480968 (D. Minn. 2002): Development Contract is not a Management Contract
CAGC v Kempthorne, 06-CV-001S (WDNY 2007): Indian Lands as a threshold issue for NIGC jurisdiction
Citizens v Kempthorne, WDNY 06-CV-0001S, January, 2007: No subject matter jurisdiciton under IGRA before Indian Lands exist
Colorado River Indian Tribes v NIGC, DC Appeals Court Opinion: Colorado River Indian Tribes v NIGC Opinion of the Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit 10-20-06
Colorado River Indian Tribes v NIGC, DDC CV 04-0010, WL 2035946 (2005): NIGC Jurisdiction over Class III Gaming - Interplay betweeen Chevron Analysis and Indian law Canon
First American Casino Corp v. Eastern Pequot Nation, 3-97CV846 (CT 2000): IGRA does not Apply to Contract with Unrecognized Tribe
Forrest Assoc. v. Passamaquoddy Tribe, 719 A2d 535 (Me 1998): Development Agreement not Void for Want of Section 81 Approval
Jena Band of Chocktaw Indians, et al. v. Ti-Millenium Corp., 98 CV 0829 (W.D. La. 2005): NIGC Determination that Contract is a Collateral Agreement Does Not Render it Void
New York v Shinnecock Indian Nation: November 7 2005 Decision by judge Platt in the Eastern District of New York
NGV Gaming V. Upstream Point Molate October 2005 Unreported Opinion: October 2005 District Court Decision on Rehearing Reverses Position on Indian Lands
NGV Gaming v. Upstream Point Molate, 355 Fed. Sup. 2d. 1066 (N. D. Ca. 2005): Condition Precedent of NIGC Approval not a bar to Enforcement of Agreements where no Indian Lands had yet Been Acquired
Penobscot Indian Nation v. Key Bank, 112 F. 3rd 538 (1st Cir. 1997): Section 81 does not Apply to Lands Purchased for Investment Purposes
Scutti Enterprises LLC v. Park Place Entertainment Corp., 322 F. 3d 211 (2d Cir. 2005): Second Circuit Decision in Contract Interference Case Related to Mohawk Casino at Akwesasne
Trump Hotels and Casino Resorts Development Co. LLC v Rostow, et. al., 3:3CV1133 (2004 D.C. CT): IGRA Does not Apply to Precursory Agreement to Enter into a Management Contract
U S ex rel St Regis Mohawk Tibe v Presidents RC St Regis Mgt Co, 7:02CV 845 (NDNY 2005): Constuction Contract is not a Management Contract or Collateral Agreement under IGRA
U S ex rel St Regis Mohawks v President Casinos et al: June 2006 Decision by Second Circuit reversing District Court on ground that status of construction contract must be determined by NIGC
Vanadium Corp. v. Fidelity and Deposit Co., 159 F.2d 105 (2nd Cir 1947): Requirement of Section 81 Approval Does Not Render Obligation to Seek Approval Void
Carvel v. Noonan, 3 NY 3rd 182 (2004): NY Court of Appeals Decision on Certified Question from 2nd Circuit Regarding Wrongfulness of Economic Pressure under NY Law.
Dalton v Pataki, 2005 WL 1017641 (NY 2005): New York's Highest Court Broadly Affirms Constitutionality of Legislation Authorizing Various Forms of Gaming, Including Indian Gaming
Guard-Life Corp. v. S. Parker Hardware Mfg. Co., 406 N.E. 2d 445 (NY 1980): Conduct Intended to Advance a Competing Interest not Wrongful By Itself
Hannex Corp. v. GMI, Inc., 140 F 3rd 194 (2d Cir. 1998): Knowing Participation in Fiduciary Breach as Wrongful Means
Metropolitan Opera Association v Local 100, 00 CV 3613 (S.D. NY 2003): Accepting the Benefit of a Breach of Fiduciary Duty can be Wrongful Conduct
NBT Bancorp v Fleet/Norstar Financial Group, 87 N.Y.2d 614 (1996 N.Y: Discussion of Requirement of Wrongful Means in Interference Cases
Scutti v PPE: Decision on Summary Judgement - August 2005
Letter from St. Regis Mohawk Tribe to BIA and NIGC: November 2, 2005 Letter Withdrawing Kutschers Application and Returning to Raceway
Testimony of Gov. Pataki to House Committee - July 2005: Recent Testimony Includes Statements Concerning Readiness to Approve Project
A.2 St. Regis tribe tells Pataki, Harrahs it will push for single proposal on Monticello Raceway land: Link to November 3, 2005 Albany Times Union Article by James M. Odato
A.3 Tribe Drops Casino Proposal for Kustchers - NY Newsday: Link to November 4, 2005 AP News Story about decsion to proceed with Raceway
A.4. Press Release on judgement interest: Litigation Trust press release of July 17, 2007 concerning Tribal Court Order to clarify judgement interest rate
C.1 Boston Globe Article: 10-31-01
C.2. Fixing the Dice: Boston Globe Editorial 11-16-01: Editorial criticizes influence of Park Place in indian gaming matters
C.3. New York Times: March 18 2003: Reporter Charles Bagli cites recently filed tapes in story about casino delays
A.1. Chronological Summary of the Tapes: Brief summaries of the conversations on the tapes
A.2. Exerpts from the Tapes: Excerpts of relevant material from the tapes
A.3. Tape 1 - Transcript of Conversations on February 8, 2000: Chief Thompson Discusses Concerns Over PPE Strategy
B. Tape 2 - Transcript of Conversations on February 8, 2000: Cummis and Horn: Discussion of Mohawk Relations and Matters of Mutual Concern to PPE and Presidents
C. Tape 3 - Transcript of Conversations on February 11: Thompson & Horn: Discuss PPE Proposal for Assistance, Horn & McDonald: Concern About Trigger Proposed for Loan Repayment Tied to Proceeding with Raceway Project
D. Tape 4 - Transcript of Conversations on February 17-27, 2000: 2-16 Kaufman & Cummis: Success of PPE Mtg with Mohawks, PPE indemnification, Payroll squeeze; 2-17 Horn & Cummis: Issues Surface in Negotiations; 2-24 Horn & Cummis: Mohawks Concerned about Akwesasne; 2-27 Horn & Cummis(2): Negotiations and Strategy
E. Tape 5 - Transcript of Conversations on February 29, 2000: 1)Horn and Cummis Negotiate arrangement btw PPE and President RC; 2)Horn and Thompson: Discussion of mutual concerns; 3) & 4)Horn & Kaufman attempt to reach Cummis; 5) Thompson and Kaufman: status of negotiations 6) & 7) Reaching Cummis
F. Tape 6 - Transcript of conversatons in March and April, 2000: 3/13:-Cummis & Kaufman: Contract Negotiations; 3/15 - Horn & Cummis: Cummis, 'taking care of' NY and Washington, presses revised structure; Cummis, Kaufman & Horn: discuss language; 4/4 - Kaufman & Cummis: differences aired;
G. Tape 7 - Transcript of Conversations in April 2000: April 13 Cummis & Horn: Cummis describes final terms with Mohawks, Real Interest is Monticello; Several Days Later Horn, Thompson, and other Chiefs Licenses have suddenly been revoked.
H. Memo Supporting 60b Motion to Vacate Judgment: Plaintiffs Memorandum of Law Supporting Motion to vacate original Judgment
I. Plaintiffs Memo of Law submitted after discovery

Catskill Litigation Trust

Document Actions

Cases