25 C.F.R. § 290.23
How does the Indian tribe resolve disputes arising from per capita payments to individual members or identified groups of members?
You must utilize or establish a tribal court system, forum or administrative process for resolving disputes arising from the allocation of net gaming revenue and the distribution of per capita payments.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2005–2021 · leading case: Jessica Tavares v. Gene Whitehouse, 851 F.3d 863 (9th Cir. 2017).
Jessica Tavares v. Gene Whitehouse, 851 F.3d 863 (9th Cir. 2017). “See 25 C.F.R. §290.23 ; Lewis v. Norton, 424 F.”
Lewis v. Norton, 424 F.3d 959 (9th Cir. 2005). “” The IGRA and related regulations therefore do not waive the tribe’s sovereign immunity over this intra-tribal membership dispute.”
Wren v. Thunder Valley Casino (E.D. Cal. 2021). “While other plaintiffs have argued that the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act has 10 acted as a waiver of tribal sovereign immunity in the gaming arena, the Ninth Circuit has rejected 11 this argument: 12 To the contrary, 25 C.F.R. § 290.23 explicitly states that “disputes arising…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.