This text of California § 98020. (98020. (Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 860, Sec. 4.)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
(a)A California Indian tribe that is party to a current ratified tribal-state gaming compact, or that is party to current secretarial procedures pursuant to Chapter 29 of Title 25 of the United States Code, may bring an action in superior court, filed solely against licensed gambling enterprises and third-party providers of proposition player services seeking a declaration as to whether a controlled game operated by a licensed
gambling establishment and banked by a third-party provider of proposition player services constitutes a banking card game that violates state law, including tribal gaming rights under Section 19 of Article IV of the California Constitution, and may also request injunctive relief.
(b)The court may make a binding declaration in either affirmative or negative
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
(a)
A California Indian tribe that is party to a current ratified tribal-state gaming compact, or that is party to current secretarial procedures pursuant to Chapter 29 of Title 25 of the United States Code, may bring an action in superior court, filed solely against licensed gambling enterprises and third-party providers of proposition player services seeking a declaration as to whether a controlled game operated by a licensed
gambling establishment and banked by a third-party provider of proposition player services constitutes a banking card game that violates state law, including tribal gaming rights under Section 19 of Article IV of the California Constitution, and may also request injunctive relief.
(b)
The court may make a binding declaration in either affirmative or negative form and
effect, which shall have the force of a final judgment, and may issue injunctive relief enjoining further operation of the controlled game or grant any other relief the court deems appropriate. No claim for money damages, penalties, or attorney’s fees shall be permitted under this section.
(c)
Any review as to whether a controlled game operated by a licensed gambling establishment and banked by a third-party provider of proposition player services constitutes a banking card game that violates state law, including tribal gaming rights under Section 19 of Article IV of the California Constitution, shall be conducted de novo.
(d)
An action under this section shall be filed no later than April 1, 2025, in the Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento.
(e)
If multiple actions are commenced under this section, they shall be consolidated for all purposes, including trial to avoid the risk of inconsistent declarations.
(f)
Notwithstanding Section 387 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the state, any California Indian tribe that is party to a current ratified tribal-state gaming compact or that is party to current secretarial procedures, any licensed
gambling enterprise, and any third-party provider of proposition player services shall be entitled to intervene as a matter of right in an action commenced under this section.
(g)
Nothing herein is intended to authorize an action for declaratory or injunctive relief against the state, or otherwise impose any liability against the state or its officers.
(h)
Notwithstanding Section 527 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in an action filed pursuant to this section, a court shall not issue a preliminary injunction or a temporary restraining order to stop an increase in the number of gambling tables authorized at
an establishment pursuant to Section 19961.07 or 19962 of the Business and Professions Code.
(i)
As used in this section, the terms “gambling enterprise,” “gambling establishment,” and “third-party provider of proposition player services” have the same meanings as in the Gambling Control Act (Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 19800) of Division 8 of the Business and Professions Code).
(j)
A court order issued pursuant to this section that declares a controlled game to be in violation of state law or enjoins further operation of a controlled game
found to be in violation of state law shall not take effect until 60 days following entry of the order.