Legal Opinion

Cherestal v. Office of the Director of Regulations

Mohegan Gaming Disputes Trial Court

Decided August 27, 2002No. GDTC-AA-02-132PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MANFREDI, Judge.

The Plaintiff filed this appeal on April 11, 2002, from a decision of the Director of Regulations regarding revocation of a gaming license. The Plaintiff has represented himself pro se throughout this matter. This appeal is brought pursuant to the provisions of Tribal Ordinance 95-6.

The record before the court consists of the following:

1. A January 22, 2002 letter to Mr. Cherestal from Edward F. Pickett, Jr. barring him from the Casino based upon his arrest on January 5, 2002 by the Norwich Police Department for carrying a dangerous weapon and carrying a weapon in a vehicle.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Novak v. AndersonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1979
  3. Pineiro v. Office of the Director of RegulationMohegan Gaming Disputes Trial Court · 1999
  4. Worthen v. Mohegan Tribal Gaming AuthorityMohegan Gaming Disputes Trial Court · 2000
  5. Trokov v. Office of the Director of RegulationMohegan Gaming Disputes Trial Court · 2000

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Nesbit v. Office of the Director of RegulationMohegan Gaming Disputes Trial Court · 2003
  2. Carpenter v. Mohegan Tribal Gaming AuthorityMohegan Gaming Disputes Trial Court · 2007

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API