2013-00144531-CU-CR

Ronald D. Carter vs. Thunder Valley Casino

Nature of Proceeding: Motion to Quash Service of Summons

Filed By: Snoke, Michael J.

Defendant Thunder Valley Casino’s motion to quash service of summons is granted.

Plaintiff Ronald Carter alleges that he was wrongfully ordered off of a bus providing
service to Defendant’s casino facility, and subsequently denied bus service by
Defendant. Plaintiff asserts a single cause of action for Intentional Tort –
“Discrimination.”

Defendant asserts tribal sovereign immunity. Federally recognized Indian tribes are
quasi-sovereign nations that are immune from suit unless Congress has specifically
authorized suit or the tribe has waived its immunity. (Ameriloan v. Superior Court
(2008) 169 Cal.App.4th 81, 89.)

Defendant contends that because Plaintiff’s claims arise out of Defendant’s operation
of the Thunder Valley Casino, they are governed by the Amended Tribal-State
Compact between the United Auburn Indian Community (“Tribe”) and the State of
California. Defendant further argues that the Tribe has adopted an Amended Tort
Claims Ordinance pursuant to the Compact that provides the exclusive procedures
and remedies for claims of bodily injury, property damage or personal injury arising out
of the operation of the Thunder Valley Casino. (Def. Ex. D.) Defendant argues that the
Amended Tort Claims Ordinance limits Plaintiff’s remedies to the Tribe’s administrative
forum with appeal to JAMS arbitration. (Def. Ex. D.) The Amended Tort Claims
Ordinance prescribes the limited waiver of the Tribe’s sovereign immunity, and does
not permit judicial proceedings to resolve Plaintiff’s claims.

Plaintiff does not address Defendant’s arguments in his Opposition.

As Plaintiff has not established that his suit is authorized by Congress or that
Defendant has waived its immunity, there is no basis for this Court to assume
jurisdiction over the Tribe.

The motion to quash service of summons is granted. This action is dismissed.

The prevailing party shall prepare a formal order for the Court’s signature pursuant to
C.R.C. 3.1312.