Alexandria Parrotta v. Island Resort and Casino

No. 25-1283 · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · October 23, 2025 · No. 25-1283

Summary

The Sixth Circuit affirmed dismissal of Alexandria Parrotta’s FLSA and related state-law claims against Island Resort and Casino, which is owned and operated by the Hannahville Indian Community. The court held that tribal sovereign immunity barred the suit because the tribe had not clearly waived its immunity, and the FLSA’s applicability did not itself authorize a private judicial action against the tribe. The court also held that generalized commitments to comply with federal law in the tribal constitution did not constitute a clear waiver.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Writing for the Court
John B. Nalbandian; Andre B. Mathis; Kevin G. Ritz
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decision date
October 23, 2025
Docket number
25-1283
Procedural posture
Appeal from dismissal without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) on tribal sovereign-immunity grounds.
Standard of review
De novo review of the district court's determination concerning subject-matter jurisdiction; the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing jurisdiction.
Precedential value
Published and recommended for publication; precedential under Sixth Circuit rules.
Parties
Alexandria Parrotta v. Island Resort and Casino
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

tribal sovereigntysubject matter jurisdictionflsamotions to dismissemployment law

Practice areas

Indian lawsovereign immunityemployment lawfederal jurisdiction

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Hannahville Indian Community's tribal sovereign immunity deprived the federal courts of subject-matter jurisdiction over Parrotta's claims.
  2. Whether the Hannahville Indian Community's general constitutional commitment not to conflict with applicable federal laws constituted a clear waiver of tribal sovereign immunity.
  3. Whether the Fair Labor Standards Act's applicability to the tribe independently permitted Parrotta to bring a private judicial action against the tribal entity.

Holdings

  1. Tribal sovereign immunity barred Parrotta's claims against Island Resort and Casino, and the district court therefore had no subject-matter jurisdiction over the suit.
  2. The Hannahville Indian Community's constitutional promise not to exercise its powers in conflict with applicable federal laws did not constitute a clear waiver of sovereign immunity.
  3. The FLSA's substantive applicability to the Hannahville Indian Community did not eliminate tribal sovereign immunity or authorize Parrotta to sue the tribe under the FLSA's private cause of action.

Key quotations

It can be removed through (1) a “clear” waiver by the tribe or (2) an “unequivocal[]” abrogation by Congress. (at 2)
A tribe’s commitment to follow the law is distinct from its concession to appear in court when a private party accuses it of violating the law. (at 4)
But that’s distinct from the remedial matter of whether Parrotta can seek relief against the HIC through a lawsuit. (at 5)

Factual background

Alexandria Parrotta worked at Horizons Steakhouse, a restaurant operated by Island Resort and Casino. She alleged that her manager pressured her to resign rather than accommodating her needs as a new mother. Island Resort and Casino is owned and operated by the federally recognized Hannahville Indian Community.

Procedural history

Parrotta sued Island Resort and Casino in the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan, asserting claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and related state-law claims. The defendant moved to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, arguing that it was owned and operated by the federally recognized Hannahville Indian Community and was protected by tribal sovereign immunity. A magistrate judge recommended dismissal, the district court adopted the recommendation over Parrotta's objection, and Parrotta timely appealed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…