Rumsey Indian Rancheria of Wintun Indians v. Wilson, s. 93-16609
| Decision Date | 29 October 1996 |
| Docket Number | 93-16745,Nos. 93-16609,s. 93-16609 |
| Citation | 99 F.3d 321 |
| Parties | RUMSEY INDIAN RANCHERIA OF WINTUN INDIANS; Table Mountain Rancheria; Cher-Ae Heights Indian Community of the Trinidad Rancheria; San Manual Band of Mission Indians; Viejas Reservation of the Captain Grande Band of Diegueno Mission Indians and Hopland Band of Pomo Indians; Barona Band of Mission Indians; Sycuan Band of Mission Indians; Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Pete WILSON, Governor; State of California, Defendants-Appellants. RUMSEY INDIAN RANCHERIA OF WINTUN INDIANS; Table Mountain Rancheria; Cher-Ae Heights Indian Community of the Trinidad Rancheria; San Manual Band of Mission Indians; Viejas Reservation of the Captain Grande Band of Diegueno Mission Indians and Hopland Band of Pomo Indians; Wintun Indians; San Manual Band of Mission Indians; Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Mission Indians of the Santa Ysabel Reservation, California; Viejas Reservation, of the Captain Grande Band of Diegueno Mission Indians; San Manual Band of Mission Indians, the Hopland Band of Pomo Indians; the Sycuan Band of Mission Indians; the Morongo Band of Mission Indians; the Santa Rosa Band of Tache Indians; the Cachil Dehe Band of Wintun Indians of the Colusa Indian Community; the Soboba Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians; the Robinson Band of Pomo Indians; the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians; and the Barona Group of the Captain Grande Band of Mission Indians, Plaintiffs-Appellees-Cross-Appellants, v. Pete WILSON, Governor; State of California, Defendants-Appellants-Cross-Appellees. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Before: WALLACE and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges; KELLEHER, * District Judge.
Prior report: 64 F.3d 1250.
By order dated December 5, 1995 this panel construed appellees' letter briefs of August 28, 1995 as a renewed petition for rehearing in light of a California appellate court decision. We deferred consideration of the petition pending the decision by the California Supreme Court in that case, Western Telcon v. California State Lottery, 13 Cal.4th 475, 53 Cal.Rptr.2d 812, 917 P.2d 651 (1996). The California Court has issued its opinion and the parties have filed additional letter briefs on the impact of Western Telcon on our decision in this matter. We have considered the arguments of the parties and are not persuaded that the decision in Western Telcon has any impact on our decision in Rumsey. Therefore, our opinion will remain unchanged.
The motion of GTECH Corporation for leave to file an amicus brief regarding the remand order in this matter is DENIED.
The Opinion filed on November 15, 1994, as amended August 11, 1995, slip op. 9977, and appearing at 64 F.3d...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kelly v. First Astri Corp.
...lands." (Rumsey Indian Rancheria of Wintun Indians v. Wilson (9th Cir.1994) 64 F.3d 1250, 1255 (Rumsey ), opn. amended on den. of rehg. 99 F.3d 321, cert. denied Sycuan Band of Mission Indians v. Wilson (1997) 521 U.S. 1118, 117 S.Ct. 2508, 138 L.Ed.2d 1012.) The Rumsey court explained that......
-
FORT INDEPENDENCE INDIAN COMMUNITY v. California
...negotiate in "good faith." Id., Rumsey Indian Rancheria of Wintun Indians v. Wilson, 64 F.3d 1250, 1258 (9th Cir.1994), amended by 99 F.3d 321 (9th Cir.1996). The State may negotiate "regarding aspects of class III tribal gaming that might affect legitimate State interests." Coyote Valley I......
-
Dairyland Greyhound Park, Inc. v. Doyle
...See Rumsey Indian Rancheria of Wintun Indians v. Wilson, 41 F.3d 421, 427 (9th Cir. 1994), amended, 64 F.3d 1250 (9th Cir.1994) and 99 F.3d 321 (9th Cir.1996) ("IGRA does not require a state to negotiate over one form of Class III gaming activity simply because it has legalized another, alb......
-
Panzer v. Doyle
...Rumsey Indian Rancheria of Wintun Indians v. Wilson, 41 F.3d 421, 427 (9th Cir. 1994),amended, 64 F.3d 1250 (9th Cir. 1995) and 99 F.3d 321 (9th cir. 1996) ("IGRA does not require a state to negotiate over one form of Class III gaming activity simply because it has legalized another, albeit......
-
Negotiating meaningful concessions from states in gaming compacts to further tribal economic development: satisfying the "economic benefits" test.
...(70.) Id. [section] 2710(d)(1)(B); Rumsey Indian Rancheria of Wintun Indians v. Wilson, 64 F.3d 1250 (9th Cir. 1994), reh'g denied, 99 F.3d 321 (1996) (holding that if the state does not permit other forms of gambling, it need not negotiate gaming compacts with Indian tribes); Washburn, sup......