Legal Opinion

Belisle v. Office of the Director of Regulation

Mohegan Gaming Disputes Trial Court

Decided April 5, 2007No. GDTC-AA-06-130-PMGPublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION IN LI-MINE/PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO PRESENT ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE

GUERNSEY, Chief Judge.

The Defendant, Office of the Director of Regulation, in response to the Pro Se Plaintiff s request to present additional evidence1, filed a Motion in Limine on grounds that the Gaming Disputes Court lacks authority to hear an appeal of a final agency decision de novo. At the hearing on Defendant’s motion, both the issue of a hearing de novo and whether the Defendant should be permitted to present additional evidence before the agency were considered.

For…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Salmon v. Department of Public Health & Addiction ServicesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2002
  2. Montgomery v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2005
  3. Culley v. Office of the Director of RegulationMohegan Gaming Disputes Trial Court · 2006
  4. Spruill v. Office of the Director of RegulationMohegan Gaming Disputes Trial Court · 2003

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Burnett v. Mohegan Tribal Gaming AuthorityMohegan Gaming Disputes Trial Court · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API