Legal Opinion
Diamond Game Enterprises, Inc. v. Reno
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided June 23, 1998No. 1:97-cv-00452PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
URBINA, District Judge.
I. Introduction
The plaintiffs 1 bring suit seeking declaratory judgment and injunctive relief to prevent the defendants 2 from commencing forfeiture proceedings on gaming devices used in Indian gaming casinos. Specifically, the plaintiffs seek an order declaring that the Lucky Tab II machine is a Class II electronic aid which, under the Indian Gaming Regulation Act, (“IGRA”), 25 U.S.C. § 2703(7)(A), assists its users in playing the traditional pull-tab game. In addition, the plaintiffs also seek to enjoin the defendants from interfering with the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Thompson Ex Rel. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Morton v. MancariSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Radzanower v. Touche Ross & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
- California v. Cabazon Band of Mission IndiansSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Seneca-Cayuga Tribe v. National Indian Gaming CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2003
- United States v. 162 MegaMania Gambling DevicesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2000
- Chesapeake Amusements, Inc. v. RiddleCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2001
- Diamond Game Enterprises, Inc. v. RenoCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2000
- United States v. 103 Electronic Gambling DevicesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.