Bodi v. Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians

Filing 40

ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 1/9/14. The Court HEREBY ORDERS the parties DIRECTED to provide further briefing on the following questions: Does an Indian tribe's removal of an action to federal court constitute a waiver of sove reign immunity? How is the analysis affected by the fact that the plaintiff in the underlying action was a tribe member? Opening briefs are due within 14 days of docketing of this order. Reply briefs, in any, are due 14 days thereafter. Briefs ma y be no longer than 7 pages in length. 2 The hearing on defendants' 18 Motion to Dismiss, currently set for hearing on January 13, 2014, is CONTINUED to March 3, 2014 at 10:00 a.m.in Courtroom 4 (LKK) before Judge Lawrence K. Karlton. (Meuleman, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

BETH A. BODI,

12

15

CIV. S-13-1044 LKK/CKD

Plaintiff,

13
14

No.

v.

ORDER

SHINGLE SPRINGS BAND OF MIWOK
INDIANS; and DOES 1 through
15, inclusive,

16

Defendants.

17
18

Plaintiff Beth A. Bodi’s Second Amended Complaint (“SAC,”

19

ECF No. 17) alleges that she was wrongfuly terminated from her

20

employment in violation of federal and state law. Defendants

21

Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians (“Tribe”), Shingle Springs

22

Tribal Health Program, Shingle Springs Tribal Health Board, and

23

Brenda Adams have moved to dismiss the SAC; a hearing on the

24

motion is currently scheduled for January 13, 2014. (ECF No. 18.)

25

Having reviewed the parties’ filings, the court will continue the

26

hearing so that the parties may brief an issue relating to the

27

topic of tribal sovereign immunity.

28

////
1

1

It is well-settled that Indian tribes possess “the common-

2

law immunity from suit traditionally enjoyed by sovereign

3

powers.” Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S. 49, 58 (1978).

4

“Absent congressional or tribal consent to suit, state and

5

federal courts have no jurisdiction over Indian tribes; only

6

consent gives the courts the jurisdictional authority to

7

adjudicate claims raised by or against tribal defendants.” Pan

8

Am. Co. v. Sycuan Band of Mission Indians, 884 F.2d 416, 418 (9th

9

Cir. 1989).

10

The basis of defendants’ motion is that the Tribe, as a

11

federally-recognized tribal entity, is immune from suit, and that

12

the other defendants are similarly immune due to their

13

relationship with the Tribe. In opposition, plaintiff argues that

14

Congress abrogated tribal sovereign immunity in enacting the

15

Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993; alternatively, she argues

16

that defendants have waived immunity through their actions.

17

The court is concerned by a predicate question: whether the

18

Tribe waived sovereign immunity by removing the action to federal

19

court.

20

The issue is an open one in the Ninth Circuit. District

21

courts to have considered it focus their analysis on whether

22

tribal immunity is more analogous to states’ immunity to suit

23

under the Eleventh Amendment, or to foreign nations’ immunity

24

under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, 27 U.S.C.

25

§ 1602 et seq. Courts taking the former position have found

26

removal to constitute waiver, see, e.g., State Eng’r v. S. Fork

27

Band of the Te–Moak Tribe of W. Shoshone Indians, 66 F. Supp. 2d

28
2

1

1163 (D. Nev. 1999),1 while courts taking the latter position

2

have not, see, e.g., Ingrassia v. Chicken Ranch Bingo and Casino,

3

676 F. Supp. 2d 953 (E.D. Cal. 2009).

4

What distinguishes this case from these precedents (and

5

others) is that plaintiff is a member of the Tribe. While “the

6

doctrine of tribal immunity from suit might have been thought

7

necessary to protect nascent tribal governments from

8

encroachments by States,” Kiowa Tribe v. Mfg. Techs., 523 U.S.

9

751, 758 (1998), no such concern about parochialism is presented

10

here. Although tribal sovereign immunity is a creation of the

11

federal courts, the immunity may equally be invoked in state and

12

federal courts. See, e.g., People ex rel. Dept. of Transportation

13

v. Naegele Outdoor Adver. Co., 38 Cal. 3d 509 (1985) (reversing

14

judgment, inter alia, on grounds that Congress did not authorize

15

“state regulation of outdoor advertising on Indian reservation

16

lands”); Cal. Parking Servs. v. Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians,

17

197 Cal. App. 4th 814 (2011) (upholding denial of plaintiff’s

18

motion to compel arbitration on the grounds that arbitration

19

clause did not clearly waive tribal sovereign immunity); Trudgeon

20

v. Fantasy Springs Casino, 71 Cal. App. 4th 632 (1999) (upholding

21

summary judgment in favor of defendants on the basis of tribal

22

sovereign immunity). In short, there appears no principled reason

23

for defendants to have removed the action before asserting

24
25
1

26
27
28

While the district court amended its initial order on
reconsideration, the portion of the initial order finding waiver
was unaffected. See State Eng’r v. S. Fork Band of the Te–Moak
Tribe of W. Shoshone Indians, 114 F. Supp. 2d 1046 (D. Nev.
2000).
3

1

immunity. The question, then, is whether, in so doing, defendants

2

waived any immunity they may possess.

3
4

In light of the foregoing, the court hereby orders as
follows:

5

[1] The parties are DIRECTED to provide further briefing on

6

the following questions:

7

Does an Indian tribe’s removal of an action to federal

8

court constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity? How is

9

the analysis affected by the fact that the plaintiff in

10

the underlying action was a tribe member?

11

Opening briefs are due within fourteen (14) days of

12

docketing of this order. Reply briefs, in any, are due

13

fourteen (14) days thereafter. Briefs may be no longer than

14

seven (7) pages in length.

15
16

[2] The hearing on defendants’ motion, currently set for

17

hearing on January 13, 2014, is CONTINUED to March 3, 2014

18

at 10:00 a.m.

19

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20

DATED:

January 9, 2014.

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4