Skip to main content
· 6/11/2003

Federal Case

Citations

  • 331 F.3d 1094
  • 2003 Daily Journal DAR 6330
  • 2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4984
  • 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 11557

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • concluding that state did not negotiate in procedural bad faith because it “remained willing to meet with the tribe for further discussions”
  • holding the State did not negotiate in bad faith with respect to the 1999 Compact’s revenue provisions, which the tribe refused to sign
  • finding that it was not bad faith for the State to insist on a particular labor standards provision
  • finding that it was not bad faith for the State to insist on a particular labor standards provision
  • noting that Congress \ limit[ed] the proper topics for compact negotiations to those that bear a direct relationship to the operation of gaming activities\ (emphasis added)
  • concluding \that the State has negotiated in good faith\ and affirming the district court's decision to \den[y] the [tribe's] motion and enter[ ] judgment for the State\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.