Redding Rancheria v. Superior Court

Good Law
105 Cal. Rptr. 2d 773·2001 Cal. App. LEXIS 267·2001 Daily Journal DAR 3523·88 Cal. App. 4th 384·2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2866
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 6, 2001C036723California2,834 words

Opinion

Opinion

Morrison, J.

Here we hold an Indian tribe and its commercial entity are immune from an ordinary tort suit arising outside of Indian country.

Suzanne Hansard (plaintiff) sued Win River Casino and several Does in Shasta County Superior Court. She alleged she was working as a bartender at a Redding hotel, attending to a party “for defendant Win River and its employees, who had booked one of the facility’s banquet rooms[.]” “[O]ne or more” of the employees threw gifts into the crowd, and a package struck her, causing injury. She framed the complaint in terms of negligence, assault and battery.

Redding Ranchería (Tribe) moved to quash service of summons (Code Civ. Proc., § 418.10, subd. (a)(1)), alleging Win River Casino is “an economic enterprise of the Redding Ranchería, a federally recognized Indian tribe,” and, hence, immune from a state tort suit. The Tribe also alleged: “Plaintiff failed to exhaust her tribal administrative remedies, which, under tribal law, is a prerequisite to filing suit.” The facts regarding the Tribe’s status, tribal laws, and the structure of Win River Casino as a tribal enterprise were supported by a declaration of the Tribe’s attorney. In part, she…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.