Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community v. Hull
Arizona Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
FELDMAN, Justice.
In a special action, the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community (the Tribe) requested relief — what was formerly called a writ of mandamus — requiring Governor J. Fife Symington to sign a “standard gaming compact” upon the request of the Tribe as required by Proposition 201, adopted by initiative in the 1996 election and codified as A.R.S. § 5-601.01. Governor Symington had refused to sign such a compact. We have *99jurisdiction under article VI, § 5(4) of the Arizona Constitution and Rules 1(a), 2(a)(1), and 7(b), Ariz.R.P.Spec.Act.
After the ease was briefed, argued,…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Seminole Tribe of Florida v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- State Ex Rel. Clark v. JohnsonNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1995
- State Ex Rel. Stephan v. FinneySupreme Court of Kansas · 1992
- Rios v. SymingtonArizona Supreme Court · 1992
- State Compensation Fund v. SymingtonArizona Supreme Court · 1993
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Sears v. HullArizona Supreme Court · 1998
- Valencia Energy Co. v. Arizona Department of RevenueArizona Supreme Court · 1998
- Ruiz v. HullArizona Supreme Court · 1998
- American Greyhound Racing, Inc. v. HullCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- American Greyhound Racing, Inc. v. HullDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2001
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.