Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Rumsey Indian Rancheria of Wintun Indians v. Wilson

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided November 15, 1994No. Nos. 93-16609, 93-16745PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

O’SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judge:

We decide whether certain gaming activities are permitted under California law and *424thus subject to tribal-state negotiation under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.

I

Numerous federally recognized Indian tribes currently engage in various gaming activities on tribal lands in California. Desiring to engage in additional activities (the “Proposed Gaming Activities”), several tribes asked the State of California (the “State”) to negotiate a compact permitting the operation of certain stand-alone electronic gaming devices1 and live banking and percentage card games.2 The…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Mallard v. United States Dist. Court for Southern Dist. of IowaSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  2. United States v. Ron Pair Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
  3. California v. Cabazon Band of Mission IndiansSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  4. United States v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  5. Mashantucket Pequot Tribe v. State of Connecticut and William A. O'neill, Governor of the State of ConnecticutCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1990

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Clark v. JohnsonNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Panzer v. DoyleWisconsin Supreme Court · 2004
  3. American Greyhound Racing, Inc. v. HullCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
  4. American Greyhound Racing, Inc. v. HullDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2001
  5. ZDI Gaming, Inc. v. Washington State Gambling CommissionCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2009

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API