Pistor v. Garcia’s Empirical Analysis
791 F.3d 1104 · 2015
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 5 district · 6 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 25 U.S.C. § 2701 (§ 2 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment · Kentucky v. Graham · Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Although sovereign immunity is only quasi-jurisdictional in nature, Rule 12(b)(1) is still a proper vehicle for invoking sovereign immunity from suit.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In the context of a Rule 12(b)(1) motion to dismiss on the basis of tribal sovereign immunity, 'the party asserting subject matter jurisdiction has the burden of proving its existence,' i.e. that immunity does not bar the suit.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In any suit against tribal officers, we must be sensitive to whether 'the judgment sought would expend itself on the public treasury or domain, or interfere with the public administration, or if the effect of the judgment would be to restrain the [sovereign] from acting, or to compel it to act.' [¶] [Citations.] [¶] As examples of such suits, Maxwell pointed to Cook, 548 F.3d 718 , and Hardin v. White Mountain Apache Tribe, 779 F.2d 476 (9th Cir.1985). [Citation.] ... [In] Hardin , sovereign immunity barred the plaintiff from litigating a case against high-ranking tribal council members seeking to hold them individually liable for voting to eject the plaintiff from tribal land. To hold otherwise, we ruled, would interfere with the tribe's internal governance. [Citation.] ' Hardin was in reality an official capacity suit,' barred by sovereign immunity, because the alternative, to '[h]old[ ] the defendants liable for their legislative functions[,] would ... have attacked "the very core of tribal sovereignty.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Brown v. Garcia
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.