AMERICAN GREYHOUND RACING, INC., a Delaware corporation; Western Racing, Inc., a Delaware corporation; TP Racing LLLP, an Arizona limited liability partnership, Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
Jane Dee HULL, Governor of Arizona; State of Arizona; Janet Napolitano, Attorney General of the State of Arizona; State of Arizona, Defendants-Appellants, and
Richard Romley, County Attorney of Maricopa County, Arizona, Defendant,
v.
Tucson Greyhound Park, Inc., Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee.
American Greyhound Racing, Inc., a Delaware corporation; Western Racing, Inc., a Delaware corporation; TP Racing LLLP, an Arizona limited liability partnership, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
Jane Dee Hull, Governor of Arizona; State of Arizona; Janet Napolitano, Attorney General of the State of Arizona; Richard Romley, County Attorney of Maricopa County, Arizona; State of Arizona, Defendants-Appellees,
v.
Tucson Greyhound Park, Inc., Plaintiff-Intervenor.
American Greyhound Racing, Inc., a Delaware corporation; Western Racing, Inc., a Delaware corporation; TP Racing LLLP, an Arizona limited liability partnership, Plaintiffs,
v.
Jane Dee Hull, Governor of Arizona; State of Arizona; Janet Napolitano, Attorney General of the State of Arizona; State of Arizona, Defendants-Appellees, and
Richard Romley, County Attorney of Maricopa County, Arizona, Defendant,
v.
Tucson Greyhound Park, Inc., Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellant.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Argued and Submission Deferred July 8, 2002.
Submitted July 25, 2002.
Filed September 19, 2002.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Scott Bales, Lewis and Roca LLP, Phoenix, AZ, for the defendants-appellants-appellees.
Neil Vincent Wake, Linda D. Skon, Law Offices of Neil Vincent Wake, Phoenix, AZ, for the plaintiffs-appellees-appellants.
Donald M. Peters, Miller LaSota & Peters, PLC, Phoenix, AZ, for plaintiff-intervenor-appellee-appellant.
Thomas L. Hudson, Osborn, Maledon, P.A., Phoenix, AZ; Eric N. Dahlstrom, Rothstein, Donatelli, Hughes, Dahlstrom, Schoenburg & Frye, LLP, Phoenix, AZ; Daniel J. Quigley, Quigley & Whitehill, P.L.C., Tucson, AZ; Frank R. Jozwiak, Morisset, Schlosser, Ayer & Jozwiak, Seattle, WA, for the amici curiae.
Before: CANBY and RYMER, Circuit Judges, and BERTELSMAN, Senior District Judge.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Opinion by Judge CANBY; Dissent by Judge RYMER.
CANBY, Circuit Judge.
Racetrack owners and operators brought this action against the Governor of Arizona1 to challenge the legality of the Governor's actions in negotiating new gaming compacts with Indian tribes, or in extending the tribes' existing compacts. The district court denied the Governor's motion to dismiss on the ground that the compacting tribes were indispensable parties...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting Sign on now to see your case. Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
Updated daily.
Uncompromising quality.
Complete, Accurate, Current.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full
text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the
full text of the citing case.
