Legal Opinion
State of Arizona v. Tohono O'Odham Nation
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided March 29, 2016No. 13-16517, 13-16519, 13-16520PublishedCited by 43 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BEA, Circuit Judge:
This appeal requires us to consider whether sophisticated, represented parties really meant what they wrote in a gaming compact that was duly executed after years of tedious negotiations. Like the district court, we hold the parties to their words, and affirm the district court’s orders in favor of the Tohono O’odham Nation.
I
In 2002, the Tohono O’odham Nation (“the Nation”) and the State of Arizona executed a gaming compact (“the Compact”) pursuant to the federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (“IGRA”), 25 U.S.C. §§ 2701-2721. The Compact expressly authorizes Class III…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- New Hampshire v. MaineSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- National Cable & Telecommunications Assn. v. Brand X Internet ServicesSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Pennsylvania Department of Corrections v. YeskeySupreme Court of the United States · 1998
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by43 opinions
- United States v. Lonnie LillardCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2019
- Acres Bonusing, Inc v. Lester MarstonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2021
- Ak Futures LLC v. Boyd Street Distro, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2022
- Freedom From Religion v. Chino Valley Uni. Sch. Dist.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
- Quinault Indian Nation v. Mary PearsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.