Baffert suspension | Horse Racing Free Tips

CDI: Baffert’s Derby Lawsuit a ‘Manufactured Emergency’

The gaming corporation that owns Churchill Downs told a federal judge in a late-night Tuesday court filing that Bob Baffert's lawsuit to try and get his private-property banishment and exclusion from the GI Kentucky Derby lifted would not only harm the corporation's portfolio of tracks, but would hurt the owners and trainers of other horses who have rightfully earned Derby berths but would be precluded from entering if the court rules they had to be pushed off the qualifying list to make room for the barred trainer.

“This lawsuit is Bob Baffert's latest attempt to evade responsibility for his wrongdoing,” stated the Mar. 29 filing by Churchill Downs Incorporated (CDI), in United States District Court (Western District of Kentucky).

“Baffert could have filed this lawsuit ten months ago,” the filing continued. “Instead, his lawyers spent the time working the press and trying without success to persuade other courts and tribunals of Baffert's innocence. They only came to this Court after all their other gambits and legal maneuvers failed.

“They are now rushing into this Court with the 2022 Derby just over a month away, demanding an expedited preliminary injunction on the basis of a manufactured emergency in hopes of litigating Baffert's way into the race.”

Baffert had sued CDI Feb. 28 in an attempt to get an injunction enjoining CDI from suspending him from its tracks and races, and prohibiting Baffert and/or any horse trained directly or indirectly by him from earning points, qualifying and entering the Derby in 2022 and 2023.

Baffert has since transferred four Derby aspirants to other trainers, and he is simultaneously fighting an under-appeal Kentucky Horse Racing Commission suspension of 90 days that is set to start Apr. 4 because of a betamethasone positive in Medina Spirit, his now-deceased 2021 Derby winner.

“There is no legal precedent, in more than a century of Kentucky and federal law, for what would amount to a judicial takeover of the Derby—an eleventh-hour edict forcing CDI to accept a trainer whose conduct threatens the safety and integrity of the race,” CDI's filing stated, explaining how Baffert has failed to meet any of the three requirements for relief.

“First, Baffert has not shown he will suffer irreparable harm absent an injunction,” the filing stated. “His tactical, ten-month delay negates any claim of irreparable harm. His primary alleged harm—the loss of purse money—is speculative and would be fully compensable by money damages in any event.

“Nor will he lose his client base or suffer a loss of goodwill absent relief. Since his CDI suspension began, he has run horses in hundreds of races around the world at virtually the same frequency he did prior to the suspension. Although he claims some horses have been transferred from his care, he provides no evidence that these transfers resulted from CDI's suspension, rather than from the suspension imposed by the KHRC or another state racing authority…

“Second, Baffert has failed to establish a likelihood of success on the merits. His due process claim fails because CDI is a private corporation, the individual defendants are not government officials, and no one violated Baffert's rights in any event,” the filing continued.

“Baffert's claim for “wrongful exclusion” fails because CDI has a well-settled common law and contractual right to exclude from its property and its races repeat offenders like Baffert who endanger the safety of horses and jockeys, and threaten the integrity of the sport and CDI's signature events. And his antitrust claim fails because he does not allege, let alone establish, basic elements of Sherman Act liability.

“Third, the equities cut strongly in CDI's favor. An injunction would cause substantial harm to CDI, including to its business interests, brand, and customer goodwill, and would injure the owners and trainers who would lose their fairly-earned berths in the Derby to make room for Baffert,” the filing stated.

“An injunction would also undermine the strong public interest in ensuring that all who attend, watch, or bet on horse races have confidence in the safety and integrity of the sport. For all these reasons, this Court should deny Baffert's motion for a preliminary injunction. Defendants will soon file a motion to dismiss this lawsuit in its entirety.”

The post CDI: Baffert’s Derby Lawsuit a ‘Manufactured Emergency’ appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Baffert Stay Denied by Franklin County Judge

The Franklin (Ky) Circuit court has denied Bob Baffert and Amr Zedan a stay of the suspension handed down by the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission after Medina Spirit (Protonico) tested positive for betamethasone in the Kentucky Derby, ruling that the plaintiffs are not entitled to a temporary injunction.

The ruling was filed Monday afternoon by Judge Thomas Wingate, who wrote that Baffert met none of the requirements necessary for relief, and that it wasn't the job of the court to make the decision.

On February 21, 2022, nine months after the Derby, the KHRC stewards disqualified Medina Spirit and suspended Baffert for 90 days. Baffert and Medina Spirit's owner, Amr Zedan, appealed the ruling and petitioned KHRC Executive Director Marc Guilfoil for a stay. On Feb. 25, Guilfoil denied that request. On Feb. 28, Baffert and Zedan moved the KHRC for a stay. On March 17, in Franklin County Court, the plaintiffs and the KHRC presented their arguments.

“Under KRS 230.320(2)(f), the role of this Court's review is not to make an independent decision,” the document states. “By statute, Guilfoil was charged with determining whether good cause existed to issue the requested stays. Guilfoil provided the reasoning behind his decision to the Court on March 17, 2022, and the Court holds that Guilfoil did not act arbitrarily or abuse his discretion in denying Plaintiffs' requests for stays. Guilfoil cited the role of the KHRC, as crafted by the General Assembly, and Baffert's four (4) medication positives in the past 365 days”

The judge ruled that Baffert had not demonstrated irreparable injury which would be caused by the suspension, which he said was unlike the cases of other athletes presented by the plaintiffs. “Athletes have a finite period of eligibility or peak performance,” the ruling states, making the distinction between his horses, who could still compete, and himself, who could return to his coaching role after the suspension. “However, Baffert is not an athlete. He is a trainer, much more akin to a coach. Unlike certain athletes whose careers are subject to a small window of eligibility or period of peak performance, Baffert's career has spanned decades and will continue following this brief suspension.”

The judge said that the suspension would begin on April 4. “The Court understands the gravity of this ruling on Plaintiffs,” the document reads. “Accordingly, the Court will alleviate this impact by staying the implementation and enforcement of Stewards Rulings 21-0009 and 21-0010 until April 4, 2022. In the interim, Plaintiffs may seek emergency relief with the Kentucky Court of Appeals and take any necessary action to comply with the ramifications of the penalties imposed. However, absent relief from a reviewing court, the penalties imposed by Stewards Rulings 21-0009 and 21-0010 shall take effect on April 4, 2022.”

This story will be updated.

The post Baffert Stay Denied by Franklin County Judge appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

California to Honor Either Suspension or Stay of KY Baffert Ruling

As had been anticipated, the California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) will honor the 90-day suspension meted down to trainer Bob Baffert by the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission (KHRC) if the trainer's legal efforts to block the suspension aren't successful in the interim, confirmed a CHRB spokesperson Saturday morning.

Likewise, the CHRB will reciprocate any stay on the KHRC's ruling “if granted by a court,” the spokesperson confirmed in an email.

Earlier this month, the KHRC handed Baffert a 90-day suspension and a $7,500 fine after Medina Spirit (Protonico) tested positive for an elevated amount of betamethasone, a Class C anti-inflammatory corticosteroid, after last year's GI Kentucky Derby.

If enforced, the suspension will run March 8 through June 5.

On Friday, the KHRC denied Baffert's request for a stay on the suspension. In the immediate aftermath of that decision, Baffert's legal team stated that they would seek legal intervention in court.

“Denial of the stay is consistent with arbitrary and capricious manner in which the stewards have ignored the facts and law in this manner,” said Baffert attorney, Clark Brewster. “Fortunately, we will soon procedurally eclipse the biased actors and have the ear of adjudicators that adhere to the rule of law instead of man.”

The basis of the CHRB's actions is rule 1484, pertaining to “Evidence of Unfitness for License.”

The rule 1484 states: “If any applicant for a license or any licensee is under suspension, set down, ruled off, excluded from the inclosure, or otherwise barred from any racing occupation or activity requiring a license, it is prima facie evidence that he or she is unfit to be granted a license or unfit to hold a license or participate in racing in this State as a licensee during the term of any suspension or exclusion from racing imposed by any competent racing jurisdiction.”

When it comes to what will happen to the horses in Baffert's care for the duration of the 90-day suspension, the KHRC ruling states that, “Entry of all horses owned or trained by Mr. Baffert is denied pending transfer to persons acceptable to the stewards.”

The TDN emailed and texted Marc Guilfoil, the executive director of the KHRC, for clarification on who the Kentucky stewards deem acceptable, and whether that includes Baffert's assistants, but hasn't yet received a response.

The relevant rules in Kentucky appear unclear on the specifics of the horse transfer process in this particular scenario.

The TDN also asked the CHRB for clarification on what would happen to the horses in Baffert's care in California if the stay is denied in court. “We are currently working through the legal analysis with respect to whether reciprocation requires enforcement of the terms of suspension under California rules or Kentucky rules,” the CHRB spokesperson wrote, in response.

The CHRB's spokesperson did, however, highlight language in the CHRB's rules guiding disciplinary actions in cases where licenses are revoked through medication violations.

The CHRB prohibits a trainer whose license is revoked because of a medication violation from being able to benefit financially through the period of their suspension.

“This includes, but is not limited to, ensuring that horses are not transferred to licensed family members or to any other licensee who has been an employee of the licensee whose license is revoked within the previous year,” the rules state.

Furthermore, trainers suspended 60 days or more are banned from all CHRB premises, for example, and must forfeit their stalls and remove from their barn areas all “signage, colors, advertisements, training-related equipment, tack, office equipment, and any other property.”

The post California to Honor Either Suspension or Stay of KY Baffert Ruling appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Baffert Legal Team May File Contempt Motion Against NYRA

A lawyer representing trainer Bob Baffert has notified the judge handling Baffert's legal dispute with the New York Racing Association that he intends to file a motion to hold NYRA in contempt and will also seek a stay that would prevent NYRA from taking any immediate action that could lead to Baffert being suspended.

Those intentions were part of a letter sent Tuesday by Baffert attorney Craig Robertson to Judge Carol Bagley Amon, Senior United States District Judge of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. Robertson asked for a pre-motion conference to go over what are the latest developments in the Baffert-NYRA case.

After it was revealed that the Baffert-trained Medina Sprit (Protonico) tested positive for the substance betamethasone following the GI Kentucky Derby, NYRA announced on May 17 plans to temporarily suspend the Hall of Fame trainer. Baffert fought back and was granted a preliminary injunction by Amon, who ruled that Baffert's right to due process had been violated because NYRA took the action without giving him a hearing. That allowed Baffert to enter horses at Saratoga, but did not end his legal ordeal with NYRA.

On Sept. 10, NYRA announced that it had scheduled a hearing for Baffert, who, NYRA contended, has engaged in conduct detrimental to the best interest of the sport. The hearing is now scheduled to begin Oct. 11 and O. Peter Sherwood, a retired New York State Supreme Court Justice, is scheduled to serve as the hearing officer.

Robertson's argument revolves around the July 14 decision from Amon, which he writes, meant that NYRA cannot go forward until the case before Amon is fully adjudicated.

“On July 14, 2021, this Court entered an Order enjoining NYRA from enforcing its suspension,” Robertson wrote. “The Court directed that NYRA was enjoined 'pending the final hearing and determination of this action.' NYRA did not appeal the Court's ruling.”

Robertson wrote that the scheduling of a hearing was in “direct contravention” of Amon's July 4 ruling.
“…on Sept. 10, 2021, NYRA sent Baffert another letter stating that it was instituting renewed proceedings to impose the exact same suspension which was enjoined,” Robertson wrote. “The reasons set forth in NYRA's Sept. 10 letter for why it wants to suspend Baffert are the exact same ones set forth in its May 17 letter. The only thing different is that it appears that NYRA has concocted some procedures–apparently just for this case–in an attempt to retroactively install legitimacy to its blatantly unlawful actions. These 'procedures' did not exist until NYRA created them out of whole cloth two months after the Court refused to allow it to arbitrarily suspend Baffert…”

NYRA spokesperson Pat McKenna maintained that all actions taken by NYRA have been in compliance of Amon's July 14 ruling.

“NYRA is not seeking to 'enforce' the May 17, 2021 letter temporarily suspending (Baffert),” he said. “That letter is no longer in effect and NYRA does not now or in the future intend to enforce or otherwise invoke that letter as the basis for any action taken against Mr. Baffert. The current NYRA hearing proceeding was independently commenced pursuant to NYRA's common law and regulatory authority to exclude licensees, subject to the requirements of due process, and in full compliance with the U.S. District Court's order and memorandum, dated July 14, 2021, in Bob Baffert v. The New York Racing Association, Inc.”

Robertson cites NYRA's recent actions as the reason why it should be held in contempt. He wrote that the Sept. 10 letter sent to Baffert notifying him that a hearing had been scheduled was “clear and convincing evidence of noncompliance with the Court's Order.”

“In reality, the only difference between the original suspension letter (which has now been enjoined) and NYRA's latest suspension letter is the date on the letterhead,” Robertson wrote. “Until this litigation is concluded, NYRA cannot move forward with attempting to enforce a suspension against Baffert that is identical to the one which has been enjoined. NYRA should be found in contempt of this Court's injunction Order and NYRA's renewed effort to suspend Baffert should be stayed.”

After getting the stay, Baffert had six starts at Saratoga with one win. The victory came with Gamine (Into Mischief) in the GI Ballerina S. That Baffert competed in Saratoga without incident is, Robertson wrote, still another reason why NYRA should not be looking to suspend him at this time.

“There is nothing new which has transpired since NYRA was enjoined,” he wrote. “No new facts, no new allegations. If anything, the facts have moved more solidly in Baffert's favor and toward maintaining the status quo as Baffert raced several horses at the recent Saratoga meet without incident.”

According to the letter, Baffert has a final draft of his motion filed and will submit it if NYRA continues to move forward with efforts to suspend the trainer.

The post Baffert Legal Team May File Contempt Motion Against NYRA appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post