Update in Arizona v. Tohono O’odham Nation — Remaining Contract Claims Defeated

Here are the materials in State of Arizona v. Tohono O’odham Nation (D. Ariz.):

DCT Order June 25

Plaintiffs Supplemental Brief

TON Supplemental Brief

An excerpt:

For reasons explained below, the Court concludes that §§ 201(1) and 201(2) cannot be used by Plaintiffs to establish an enforceable oral agreement that the Nation would not open a casino in the Phoenix metropolitan area. The Court has already held that the  Compact between the State and the Nation includes no such agreement, and that even Plaintiffs’ extrinsic evidence does not make the Compact’s terms reasonably susceptible to such a reading. Doc. 216. The Court now concludes that the Compact is a fully integrated written agreement under Chapter 9 of the Restatement, and that such an agreement between the parties forecloses any separate oral agreement. As a result, the Court will grant summary judgment in favor of the Nation on Plaintiffs’ § 201(2) claim and deny Plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration on the § 201(1) claim.

This concludes the trial court proceedings, mostly concluded in the court’s order granting summary judgment on most claims we posted about here.