Updates to our Terms of Use

We are updating our Terms of Use. Please carefully review the updated Terms before proceeding to our website.

Tuesday, May 7, 2024 | Back issues
Courthouse News Service Courthouse News Service

Federal judge issues sanctions and ends long-running fight against tribal casino

The plaintiffs did not — and could not — name as defendant an indispensable party: the tribe.

SAN DIEGO (CN) — Across 20 different legal actions, former residents of the Jamul Indian Village in San Diego County have fought for years against the tribe’s casino, without success. Now a federal judge has in an effort to "provide finality" not only dismissed the latest case but also ordered sanctions in the form of all attorney fees since the start of the case. 

“The defense argues that plaintiffs maintained this suit solely for harassment and with full knowledge that it was doomed. After surveying the legal carnage of the past few decades — including plaintiffs’ 20-plus failed lawsuits with various shifting and meritless theories — the court must grudgingly agree," U.S. District Judge Andrew G. Schopler, a Joe Biden appointee, wrote in his order issued Thursday. "The only viable conclusion is that this action was brought in bad faith. And it is equally apparent that this campaign of harassment will not end until plaintiffs and their attorney are held to account for abusing the legal process."

If the plaintiffs and their attorneys continue filing lawsuits, both face escalating financial sanctions from the court, Schopler added. 

The case stretches back to the early 1990s, when Kumeyaay Native Americans held an election at the Jamul Indian Village, a small autonomous tribal nation in San Diego County. One group wanted to build a casino and a hotel on their tribal land, another group opposed it.

The former won the election, and the other set off a cascade of legal actions in tribal tribunals and in state and federal courts to first stop the construction of the casino. In the present action, the plaintiffs claimed construction of the casino desecrated the remains and funeral objects of their ancestors buried in a tribal cemetery owned by the Roman Catholic Church of San Diego.

In 1982, the church gave several local Kumeyaay families parcels of land they had owned since 1912. The Bureau of Indian Affairs then recognized those families as a tribe and took the land in trust to create the Jamul Indian Village, which the Village turned into the casino which was completed in 2016. In 2017 the church deeded the last parcel of land in the area, called the cemetery plot, to the Village.       

In their complaint, originally filed in state court before being removed to the federal court in San Diego, the plaintiffs claimed that the Roman Catholic Bishop of San Diego fraudulently transferred the cemetery plot to the Village as part of a scheme to avoid liability for the desecration of the plaintiffs’ ancestors' graves. The plaintiffs said the Village did not actually own the land, the bishop did. 

They also named an engineering company called Condon-Johnson Associates that worked on the construction of the casino as a co-defendant. 

But the plaintiffs misunderstand the state law they rely on for the theory that the Village is not the title owner of the land in question, Schopler wrote, unless they can prove the title was fraudulently transferred — which they did not. 

“In other words, simply alleging a fraudulent transfer doesn’t void the deed,” he wrote. 

But the bigger legal problem according to Schopler is that the Village isn’t named in the suit, despite being an indispensable party. As a federally recognized tribe, though, the Village enjoys sovereign immunity and can't be sued.  

“This conclusion should not shock plaintiffs or their attorney. It’s been a consistent court finding each time they’ve attempted to deprive the Village of land,” Schopler wrote. 

So Schopler dismissed the case and ordered sanctions against both the plaintiffs, their attorneys and the firm representing them.

“Perhaps this case will differ from the dozens preceding it, with plaintiffs finally laying down arms and accepting their losses,” Schopler wrote.     

Neither attorneys for the plaintiffs nor the Roman Catholic Bishop of San Diego immediately responded to requests for comment. 

Categories / Courts, Regional

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.

Loading...