Paddy v. Mulkey et al
Filing
35
ORDER re briefing on why this case should not be stayed while Plaintiff exhausts his tribal remedies. See order re specifics. (Opening brief due by 5/15/2009.) Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 4/15/09. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SL)
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 v. DAVID MULKEY et al., Defendants. DONOVAN PADDY, Plaintiff, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA *** ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
3:08-CV-00236-LRH-RAM ORDER
Upon review of the parties' filings, the court is uncertain whether this case should be entertained without any showing that Plaintiff has exhausted his tribal remedies. See Allstate Indem. Co. v. Stump, 191 F.3d 1071, 1073 (9th Cir. 1999) ("A district court has no discretion to relieve a litigant from the duty to exhaust tribal remedies prior to proceeding in federal court."), amended by 197 F.3d 1031 (9th Cir. 1999). "Principles of comity require federal courts to dismiss or to abstain from deciding claims over which tribal court jurisdiction is `colorable,' provided that there is no evidence of bad faith or harassment." Marceau v. Blackfeet Hous. Auth., 540 F.3d 916, 920 (9th Cir. 2008); see also Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. King Mountain Tobacco Co., 552 F.3d 1098 (9th Cir. 2009); Sharber v. Spirit Mountain Gaming Inc., 343 F.3d 974 (9th Cir. 2003). Because it appears tribal jurisdiction may be colorable, the court orders briefing on why this case should not be stayed while Plaintiff exhausts his tribal remedies. ///
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff is granted 30 days to file an opening brief. Defendants are granted 20 days to file a response, and Plaintiff is granted 10 days to file a reply. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 15th day of April 2009.
__________________________________ LARRY R. HICKS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
