2008 10 02 Tribe amicus JudgeLewis

							TIM VOLLMANN, Attorney at Law                                                             3301-R Coors Rd. N.W, PMB 302
                                                                                                  Albuquerque, NM 87120
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Phone (505) 792-9168
           (505) 881-2627
Fax (505) 792-9251
Email: Tim_Vollmann@hotmail.com


                                                                         October 2, 2008

         Judge Joan M. Lewis
         Judge of the Superior Court
         P.O. Box 122724
         San Diego, CA 92112-2724

              Re:    California Valley Miwok Tribe v. California Gambling Control
         Commission,
                     Case No. 37-2008-00075326-CU-CO-CTL

         Dear Judge Lewis:

                 This responds to your letter of September 22, 2008, requesting a citation to
         authority to support my position that an amicus brief be filed on behalf of my clients,
         Yakima and Melvin Dixie, who are challenging the plaintiff’s authority to file the
         above-styled lawsuit in the name of the Tribe, much less to demand that the gaming
         revenue shares be paid to her.

                  Although the California Rules of Court (2007) make no express provision for the
         filing of amicus briefs in Superior Court, California courts have long recognized that the
         trial judge has the discretion to permit such filings. In Stockton v. Department of
         Employment, 25 Cal.2d 264, 272, 153 P.2d 741 (1944), the California Supreme Court
         noted that the trial court had requested the State Personnel Board to file an amicus brief
         in the matter before it. More recently, the Supreme Court has commented generally on
         the efficacy of the participation of amici:

                  Amici Curiae, literally “friends of the court”, perform valuable role for the
                  judiciary precisely because they are nonparties who often have different
                  perspectives from the principal litigants; amicus curiae presentations assist the
                  court by broadening its perspective on issues raised, and facilitate informed
                  judicial consideration of information and points of view.

         Connerly v. State Personnel Board, 129 P.3d 1. 39 Cal. Rptr. 788 (2006). Other
         examples abound of trial courts permitting amicus participation. See Chavez v. Netflix,
         162 Cal.App.4th 43, 49, 75 Cal.Rptr.2d 413, 419 (C.A.1st 2008); Board of Administration
         v. Wilson, 52 Cal.App.4th 1109, 1118, n. 4, 61 Cal.Rptr.2d 207, 214 (C.A.3d 1997);
         Auchmoody v. 911 Emergency Services, 214 Cal.App.3d 1510, 1518; 263 Cal.Rptr. 278,
         282 (C.A.3d 1989). Beach Colony II v. California Coastal Comm., 151 Cal.App.3d
         1107, 1119, n. 7, 199 Cal./Rptr. 195, 203 (C.A.1st 1984). Indeed, in In re Executive Life
Ins. Co., 32 Cal.App.4th 344, 38 Cal.Rptr.2d 453, 480 (C.A.2d 1995), the Court of
Appeals observed that counsel for amicus curiae in the trial court “was permitted the
leeway of counsel for a party in argument and presentation of evidence.” 32 Cal.App.4th
at 389, 38 Cal.Rptr.2d at 480.

        In sum, your authority as a trial judge allows you to permit the filing of an amicus
brief by a person demonstrating sufficient interest in the subject of the litigation. The
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia granted our motion to file an amicus
brief in related proceedings involving similar claims of Silvia Burley to speak and act on
behalf of the Sheep Ranch Miwoks. See California Valley Miwok Tribe v. U.S.
Department of the Interior, 515 F.3d 1262 (D.C.Cir. 2008). The appellate court even
allowed us some oral argument time.



                                              Tim Vollmann

cc:    Manuael Corrales, Jr., Esq.
       Terry Singleton, Esq.
       Peter H. Kaufman, Deputy Attorney General