by
Florida's Fourth District Court of Appeal said Wednesday that a lower court was wrong to deny the tribe’s motion to dismiss based on sovereign immunity as a matter of law. The court agreed with the tribe that there was no established, enforceable resolution or compact that included a sovereign immunity waiver in 2009 when Delores Schinneller alleged she was injured.
“There is no factual dispute,” the appeals court wrote. “The trial court departed from the essential requirements of law when it denied the tribe’s motion to dismiss. This harm is irreparable if immunity is not given its intended effect.”
Schinneller sued the tribe for personal injuries after she slipped and fell in a restroom at the Seminole Hard Rock Hotel and Casino in Hollywood, Florida, court documents said.
Schinneller said in court documents that the tribe wasn’t subject to state civil jurisdiction unless it waived its right to sovereign immunity — which she claimed it did.
The tribe did enter into a gaming compact with the state of Florida in 2007 that had a provision that it would provide tort remedies for patrons who claimed they were injured at certain parts of the casino.
However, the Supreme Court of Florida in 2008 said that the compact violated Florida law, so it was voided, court documents said.
“Nevertheless, the plaintiff maintained the tribe had waived its sovereign immunity,” the appeals court said.
Another compact was approved in 2010, after the alleged slip and fall incident happened.
While the 2010 compact did maintain a limited sovereign immunity waiver, the tribe said the later compact was not retroactive so it did not apply to Schinneller’s complaint.
The tribe also provided an affidavit that said that no sovereign immunity waiver was in effect at the time of Schinneller’s lawsuit, which she did not dispute, court documents said.
Daniel A. Kirschner, one of the tribe’s attorneys, said the tribe is pleased with the appeal court’s ruling, and that it solidified the tribe’s right to sovereign immunity before the 2010 gaming compact.
Jonathan J. Luca, Schinneller’s attorney, said the affidavit the court cited is erroneous because the person who gave it quoted from tribal history from the 1800s, so it couldn't be based on personal knowledge. He also argued that the tribe agreed to waive sovereign immunity when it adopted the 2006 resolution that allowed the tribe to enter into the 2007 compact, and always functioned as if the compact were valid.
Schinneller is represented by Jonathan J. Luca of Muench & Luca PLLC.
The Seminole Tribe is represented by Daniel A. Kirschner, Mark D. Schellhase and Jeffrey T. Kuntz of GrayRobinson PA.
The case is Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Delores Schinneller, case number 4D15-1704 , the Fourth District Court of Appeal of the State of Florida.
“There is no factual dispute,” the appeals court wrote. “The trial court departed from the essential requirements of law when it denied the tribe’s motion to dismiss. This harm is irreparable if immunity is not given its intended effect.”
Schinneller sued the tribe for personal injuries after she slipped and fell in a restroom at the Seminole Hard Rock Hotel and Casino in Hollywood, Florida, court documents said.
Schinneller said in court documents that the tribe wasn’t subject to state civil jurisdiction unless it waived its right to sovereign immunity — which she claimed it did.
The tribe did enter into a gaming compact with the state of Florida in 2007 that had a provision that it would provide tort remedies for patrons who claimed they were injured at certain parts of the casino.
However, the Supreme Court of Florida in 2008 said that the compact violated Florida law, so it was voided, court documents said.
“Nevertheless, the plaintiff maintained the tribe had waived its sovereign immunity,” the appeals court said.
Another compact was approved in 2010, after the alleged slip and fall incident happened.
While the 2010 compact did maintain a limited sovereign immunity waiver, the tribe said the later compact was not retroactive so it did not apply to Schinneller’s complaint.
The tribe also provided an affidavit that said that no sovereign immunity waiver was in effect at the time of Schinneller’s lawsuit, which she did not dispute, court documents said.
Daniel A. Kirschner, one of the tribe’s attorneys, said the tribe is pleased with the appeal court’s ruling, and that it solidified the tribe’s right to sovereign immunity before the 2010 gaming compact.
Jonathan J. Luca, Schinneller’s attorney, said the affidavit the court cited is erroneous because the person who gave it quoted from tribal history from the 1800s, so it couldn't be based on personal knowledge. He also argued that the tribe agreed to waive sovereign immunity when it adopted the 2006 resolution that allowed the tribe to enter into the 2007 compact, and always functioned as if the compact were valid.
Schinneller is represented by Jonathan J. Luca of Muench & Luca PLLC.
The Seminole Tribe is represented by Daniel A. Kirschner, Mark D. Schellhase and Jeffrey T. Kuntz of GrayRobinson PA.
The case is Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Delores Schinneller, case number 4D15-1704 , the Fourth District Court of Appeal of the State of Florida.
