––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
https://test.legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
- Posted June 20, 2012
- Tweet This | Share on Facebook
Court won't stop lawsuit against tribal casino

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court won't stop a lawsuit seeking to shut down a Native American casino in Michigan.
The high court on Monday upheld a lower court decision that would allow casino foe David Patchak to sue to shut the casino down.
The Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians, also known as the Gun Lake Tribe, opened a casino in Wayland Township, 20 miles south of Grand Rapids. Patchak challenged how the government placed the land in trust for the tribe, saying that the move was illegal because the tribe had not been recognized by the government in 1934 when the Indian Reorganization Act was passed.
A federal judge dismissed his lawsuit but the high court in an 8-1 ruling decided it could move forward. Justice Sonia Sotomayor was the only dissent.
Published: Wed, Jun 20, 2012
headlines Oakland County
- Whitmer signs gun violence prevention legislation
- Department of Attorney General conducts statewide warrant sweep, arrests 9
- Adoptive families across Michigan recognized during Adoption Day and Month
- Reproductive Health Act signed into law
- Case study: Documentary highlights history of courts in the Eastern District
headlines National
- This LA lawyer levels up legal protections in the video game industry
- ACLU and BigLaw firm use ‘Orange is the New Black’ in hashtag effort to promote NY jail reform
- Legal champions to receive Spirit of Excellence Award at 2026 ABA Midyear Meeting
- Fake Sullivan & Cromwell entities used by scammers should be dissolved, suit says
- Hackers gained access to ‘small number’ of attorney emails at Williams & Connolly, firm confirms
- Before joining Anderson Kill, judge was accused of rude behavior on bench, retaliatory threats in ethics case