Legal Opinion

Cypress v. Tamiami Partners, Ltd.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided October 5, 1995No. Nos. 94-2810, 94-2898PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

Petitioners Billy Cypress and Dexter Leht-inen, officials of the Miccosukee Tribe, seek certiorari review of the trial court’s discovery order setting their depositions. We grant certiorari, finding that sovereign immunity protects petitioners.

Florida state courts do not have subject matter jurisdiction over a Native American tribe unless the tribe has expressly consented to suit or Congress has waived the tribe’s sovereign immunity to civil actions. Houghtaling v. Seminole Tribe of Florida, 611 So.2d 1235 (Fla.1993). Here, the record clearly shows that sovereign immunity has attached to…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Houghtaling v. Seminole Tribe of FloridaSupreme Court of Florida · 1993
  2. Greenstein v. Baxas Howell Mobley, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1991

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Tamiami Partners, Ltd. Ex Rel. Tamiami Development Corp. v. Miccosukee Tribe of IndiansCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1999
  2. Miccosukee Tribe of Indians v. NapoleoniDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2004
  3. Miccosukee Tribe of Indians v. BermudezDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2012
  4. Tamiami Partners v. MiccosukeeCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1999

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

Powered by the Exa API