Legal Opinion
Rosales v. United States
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided March 19, 2007No. Civil Action 07-162(RMC)PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
COLLYER, District Judge.
Plaintiffs Walter J. Rosales and Karen Toggery filed this action in an effort to stop the construction of an Indian gaming establishment on property belonging to the Jamul Indian Village in San Diego County, California. 1 According to Plaintiffs, the property on which the casino is to be built contains the remains of their deceased relatives and other funerary objects that are entitled to protection under the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, 25 U.S.C. § 3001, et seq. (“NAG-PRA”). Somewhat bafflingly, Plaintiffs do npt name as…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Piper Aircraft Co. v. ReynoSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- In Re Alan Neal ScottCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1983
- Armco Steel Co., LP v. CSX Corp.District Court, District of Columbia · 1991
- Shawnee Tribe v. United StatesDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2002
- DeLoach v. Philip Morris Companies, Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2000
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Treppel Ex Rel. Norfolk Southern Corp. v. ReasonDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2011
- Commission v. Cephalon, Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2008
- Jamul Action Committee v. E. Sequoyah SimermeyerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2020
- Pueblo v. National Indian Gaming CommissionDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2010
- Maryland Digital Copier v. Litigation Logistics, Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2019
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.