Legal Opinion
Arendt v. Ward
Ho-Chunk Nation Trial Court
Decided February 15, 2011No. CV 10-83Published
1Opinion of the Court
*445ORDER
TODD R. MATHA, Chief Judge.
INTRODUCTION
The Court must determine whether to grant the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The plaintiffs request for monetary relief is barred by tribal sovereign immunity from suit, which cannot be circumvented under the guise of requesting equitable remedies. The analysis of the Court follows below.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The plaintiff, Duane J. Arendt, by and through Attorney James C. Ritland, initiated the current action by filing a Complaint with the Court on September 17, 2010. Consequently, the Court issued a Summons accompanied by the above-mentioned Complaint…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Ex Parte YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Edelman v. JordanSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Insurance Corp. of Ireland v. Compagnie Des Bauxites De GuineeSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- United States v. CottonSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.