Pueblo of Pojoaque v. Biedscheid

• Docket Number: CIV 20-0166 JB/DLM
• Decision Date: 31 August 2023
• Parties: PUEBLO OF POJOAQUE and BUFFALO THUNDER, INC., Plaintiffs, v. THE HONORABLE BRYAN BIEDSCHEID, individually and in his official capacity as District Judge, New Mexico First Judicial District Division VI, and RUDY PENA, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of New Mexico

1

PUEBLO OF POJOAQUE and BUFFALO THUNDER, INC., Plaintiffs, v. THE HONORABLE BRYAN BIEDSCHEID, individually and in his official capacity as District Judge, New Mexico First Judicial District Division VI, and RUDY PENA, Defendants.

No. CIV 20-0166 JB/DLM

United States District Court, D. New Mexico

August 31, 2023

Ripley B. Harwood Ripley B. Harwood, P.C. Albuquerque, New Mexico Attorneys for the Plaintiffs

Hector Balderas New Mexico Attorney General Gregory Ara Chakalian Assistant Attorney General Office of the Attorney General for the State of New Mexico Santa Fe, New Mexico -- and -- Nicholas M. Sydow Assistant Attorney General Office of the Attorney General for the State of New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico Attorneys for Defendant Judge Byran Biedscheid

Linda J. Rios Michael G. Solon Rios Law Firm Albuquerque, New Mexico Attorneys for Defendant Rudy Pena

MEMORANDUM OPINION ^[1]

THIS MATTER comes before the Court on: (i) the Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment, filed June 25 2021 (Doc. 36)(“SJ Motion”); and (ii) the Plaintiffs' Motion to Reconsider Order Denying Summary Judgment, filed April 4, 2022 (Doc. 64)(“Reconsider Motion”). The Court held a hearing on the SJ Motion on February 4, 2022. See Clerk's Minutes at 1 filed February 4, 2022 (Doc. 58)(“February 4 Clerk's Minutes”). The Court held a hearing on the Reconsider Motion on July 25, 2022. See Clerk's Minutes at 1, filed July 25, 2022 (Doc. 79)(“July 25 Clerk's Minutes”). The primary issue is whether Defendant the Honorable Bryan Biedscheid, District Judge, Division VI, County of Santa Fe First Judicial District Court, State of New Mexico, has jurisdiction over Defendant Rudy Pena's State tort case, because the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, 25 U.S.C. §§ 2701-21 (“IGRA”), permits States and Tribes to shift jurisdiction from Tribal court to State court in tort suits stemming from falls near slot machines at casinos on Tribal land. The Court concludes that, while the State court lacks jurisdiction over Pena's case as pled, Plaintiffs Pueblo of Pojoaque and Buffalo Thunder, Inc. are not entitled to summary judgment for two reasons. First, the Court must abstain from issuing the requested relief under Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971)(“ Younger”). Second, the Anti-Injunction Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2283, bars the Court from issuing the requested injunctive relief. The Court further concludes, however, that it does not need to abstain from issuing the requested relief under Brillhart v. Excess Insurance Co. of America, 316 U.S. 491 (1972)(“Brillhart”), or Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States, 424 U.S. 800 (1976)(“Colorado River”). Finally, the Court concludes that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not bar the Plaintiffs' suit. Accordingly, the Court denies the SJ Motion and the Reconsider Motion.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The Court draws the factual background from the parties' assertions of undisputed material fact in their SJ Motion briefs. See Plaintiffs' Memorandum in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment at ¶¶ 1-9, at 1-2, filed June 25, 2021 (Doc. 36-1)(“SJ Motion Opening Brief”); the Defendant Rudy Pena's Memorandum in Support of Response to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment ¶¶ 1-10, at 2-3, filed July 23, 2021 (Doc. 41)(“Pena SJ Motion Response”); the Honorable Bryan Biedscheid's Response to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment ¶¶ 1-9, at 2-3, filed July 23, 2021 (Doc. 43)(“Biedscheid SJ Motion Response”). Many of this case's facts are undisputed. The Court states the undisputed material facts in the text. The Court specifically discusses facts that are purportedly disputed or actually disputed in the footnotes.

Pojoaque Pueblo is a federally recognized Tribe located in Santa Fe County, New Mexico. See SJ Motion Opening Brief ¶ 1, at 1 (asserting this fact); Pena SJ Motion Response ¶ 1, at 2 (admitting this fact); Biedscheid SJ Motion Response ¶ 1, at 2 (admitting this fact). Buffalo Thunder is a tribally chartered resort and casino located on the Pojoaque Pueblo. See SJ Motion Opening Brief ¶ 2, at 1 (asserting this fact); Pena SJ Motion Response ¶ 2, at 2 (admitting this fact); Biedscheid SJ Motion Response ¶ 2, at 2 (admitting this fact). In other words, Buffalo Thunder is within Indian country. See SJ Motion Opening Brief ¶ 3, at 1 (asserting this fact); Pena SJ Motion Response ¶ 3, at 2 (admitting this fact); Biedscheid SJ Motion Response ¶ 3, at 2 (admitting this fact). Pojoaque Pueblo wholly owns Buffalo Thunder. See SJ Motion Opening Brief ¶ 2, at 1 (asserting this fact); Pena SJ Motion Response ¶ 2, at 2 (admitting this fact); Biedscheid SJ Motion Response ¶ 2, at 2 (admitting this fact).

On February 1, 2015, Pena went to Buffalo Thunder. See SJ Motion Opening Brief ¶ 4, at 1 (admitting this fact by reference to Complaint for Personal Injuries and Damages ¶ 24, at 6, filed June 25, 2021 (Doc. 36-2)(“State Complaint”)); Pena SJ Motion Response ¶ 4, at 3; Biedscheid SJ Motion Response ¶ 4, at 2 (admitting all facts alleged in Pena's State Complaint, including this fact). Pena sat at a slot machine. See SJ Motion Opening Brief ¶ 4, at 1 (admitting this fact by reference to State Complaint ¶ 24, at 6); Pena SJ Motion Response ¶ 4, at 3 (admitting this fact); Biedscheid SJ Motion Response ¶ 4, at 2 (admitting all facts alleged in Pena's State Complaint, including this fact). Pena played on the slot machine. See Pena SJ Motion Response ¶ 4, at 3 (asserting this fact).^[2] Buffalo Thunder employees asked Pena to move. See SJ Motion Opening Brief ¶ 4, at 1 (admitting this fact by reference to State Complaint ¶ 24, at 6); Pena SJ Motion Response ¶ 4, at 3 (admitting this fact); Biedscheid SJ Motion Response ¶ 4, at 2 (admitting all facts alleged in Pena's State Complaint, including this fact). Pena stopped playing on the slot machine and swiveled his chair clockwise such that the slot machine was to his left side. See Security Camera Footage of Incident at 00:12-00:15, filed March 9, 2022 (Doc. 60)(“Accident Video”). Pena stood up and took several steps forward, away from the slot machine. See Accident Video at 00:16-00:17. A Buffalo Thunder employee moved between Pena and the slot machine. See Accident Video at 00:16-00:18. Pena lost his balance and fell backwards. See Accident Video at 00:18-00:25. Pena grabbed at a chair for balance while falling. See Accident Video at 00:1800:25. The employee reached out to Pena. See Accident Video at 00:18-00:25. Pena fell to the ground. See Accident Video at 00:18-00:25.

After Pena's fall, Buffalo Thunder employees moved chairs out of Pena's way. See Accident Video at 02:43-3:07.^[3] Pena got up. See Accident Video at 03:07-3:09. Pena then moved to a chair at a nearby slot machine and sat down. See Accident Video at 03:11-03:21. Pena remained seated at that slot machine while employees worked on the machine that Pena had been playing on and the other slot machines next to it. See Accident Video at 3:21-3:56. Pena then got up and returned to the machine he had been playing on after the employees had finished working on it. See Accident Video at 03:57-4:20. Pena resumed playing on the slot machine. See Accident Video at 4:20-4:25. In all, the entire incident -- Pena getting up from the slot machine, falling, getting up from the ground, moving to the chair, waiting, and returning to the slot machine -- lasted just over a minute and thirty seconds. See Accident Video at 2:38-4:12.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The Court summarizes the relevant procedural background in turn. The Court begins with the gaming compact at issue. Next, it provides an overview of the underlying State tort suit. Finally, the Court summarizes the procedural background in this federal suit.

1. Pojoaque Gaming Compact.

On August 31, 2017, the State of New Mexico and the Pojoaque Pueblo executed the Indian Gaming Compact Between the State of New Mexico and the Pojoaque Pueblo (dated August 31, 2017), filed June 15, 2021 (Doc. 36-8)(“Pojoaque Gaming Compact”). The Pojoaque Gaming Compact § 8 provides:

A. Policy Concerning Protection of Visitors. The safety and protection of visitors to a Gaming Facility is a priority of the Tribe, and it is the purpose of this Section to assure that any such persons who suffer bodily injury or property damage proximately caused by the conduct of the Gaming Enterprise have an effective remedy for obtaining fair and just compensation. To that end, in this Section, and subject to its terms, the Tribe agrees to carry insurance that covers such injury or loss, agrees to a limited waiver of its immunity from suit, and agrees to proceed either in binding arbitration proceedings or in Tribal, State, or other court of competent jurisdiction) at the visitor's election with respect to claims for bodily injury or property damage proximately caused by the conduct of the Gaming Enterprise. For purposes of this Section, any such claim may be brought in state district court, including claims arising on tribal land, unless it is finally determined by a state or federal court that the IGRA does not permit the shifting of jurisdiction over visitors' personal injury suits to state court.

....

D. Specific Waiver of Immunity and Choice of Law. The Tribe, by entering into this Compact and agreeing to the provisions of this Section, waives its defense of sovereign immunity in connection with any claims for compensatory damages for bodily injury or property damage up to the amount of ten million dollars ($10,000,000) per occurrence, asserted as provided in this Section. This is a limited waiver and does not waive the Tribe's immunity from suit for any other purpose. The Tribe shall ensure that a policy of insurance that it acquires to fulfill the requirements of this Section shall include a provision under which

...