Legal Opinion
Sears v. Hull
Arizona Supreme Court
Decided July 16, 1998No. CV-97-0477-T/APPublishedCited by 92 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
McGREGOR, Justice.
¶ 1 Plaintiffs brought a special action in superior court to enjoin the Governor from entering any gaming compact that permits slot machine or keno gambling with the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community. We hold that this action must be dismissed because plaintiffs lack standing.
I
¶2 Because our opinion in Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community v. Hull, 190 Ariz. 97, 945 P.2d 818 (1997), sets forth in detail most of the facts relevant to the instant action, we describe only briefly the facts and procedure leading to this appeal.
¶ 3 In 1992, the Arizona…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Warth v. SeldinSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Seminole Tribe of Florida v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority v. Citizens for the Abatement of Aircraft Noise, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Jenkins v. SwanUtah Supreme Court · 1983
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by92 opinions
- Saratoga County Chamber of Commerce, Inc. v. PatakiNew York Court of Appeals · 2003
- Martin v. ReinsteinCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1999
- Godfrey v. StateSupreme Court of Iowa · 2008
- OSAGE NATION v. BD. OF COMMISSIONERS OF OSAGE COUNTY and OSAGE NATION v. OSAGE COUNTY BD. OF ADJUSTMENTSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2017
- Bennett v. NapolitanoArizona Supreme Court · 2003
87 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.