Indian Gaming > California doesn't want to be a party in Pechanga gaming case

California doesn't want to be a party in Pechanga gaming case

Thursday, March 17, 2011
Filed Under: California | Compacts | Litigation

The state of California says it shouldn't be a party in a gaming lawsuit against the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians.

The state says the Class III gaming compact requires the state and the tribe to meet in person before going to court. That didn't happen before the city of Temecula filed the lawsuit and named the state as a party.

If the state is removed as a party, it's not clear whether the case can move forward. The state signed the compact, not the city.

A hearing is scheduled for April 11 to discuss the state's motion and the tribe's motion to dismiss. Turtle Talk has posted documents from the case, Temecula v. Pechanga Band.

Get the Story:
State wants out of Temecula's lawsuit against Pechanga (The Riverside Press-Enterprise 3/17)

Related Stories:
Judge sets hearing in case for Pechanga Band gaming agreement (3/14)
City continues litigation over Pechanga Band gaming agreement (1/18)
Pechanga Band labels lawsuit over gaming deal a 'political ploy' (10/21)
Pechanga Band won't allow process server on the reservation (10/18)
City files lawsuit against Pechanga Band for casino agreement (10/6)
City votes to sue Pechanga Band of gaming impact agreement (8/11)
Pechanga Chair: Tribe honors commitments with gaming deals (8/10)
Pechanga Band negotiates agreement to address casino impacts (8/5)