California Horse Racing Board | Horse Racing Free Tips

Alleging ‘Destroyed’ Reputation, Baltas Sues CHRB for $12 Million

Claiming that the California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) has “destroyed” his reputation as a trainer by issuing a 47-count complaint pertaining to the alleged race-day administration of substances to his horses and then purportedly violating his rights to due process when he tried to resolve the charges, Richard Baltas is suing the CHRB, its commissioners, and executive director for at least $12 million in damages.

According to a lawsuit filed Aug. 17 in Superior Court for the State of California (Los Angeles County), the lawsuit also stated that the CHRB has additionally allegedly not complied in full with Baltas's legal attempts to proceed with discovery of materials related to his case, “thereby forcing Baltas to proceed with information and documents that are being withheld and concealed from him…”

The CHRB's June 21 complaint stated that “Between the dates of 4/15/2022 to 5/8/2022, 23 horses trained by RICHARD BALTAS were administered a substance on days they were entered into races. Surveillance video captured all administrations by employees of BALTAS's barn. The substance was analyzed by University of California, Davis, who reported the presence of Higenamine and Paenol.”

According to the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA), higenamine is a chemical found in a variety of plants, and can act as an anti-asthmatic to open up airways. Paenol is also a plant extract. Neither are specifically classified by the Association for Racetrack Commissioners International uniform classification guidelines.

The lawsuit continued: “None of the counts in the CHRB Complaint are valid, and each of them reflect a malicious intent by the Defendants.”

Last month, a Los Angeles Superior Court Judge denied a request by Baltas to order the CHRB to allow him to enter horses. The next scheduled action in that separate case is a Sept. 29 conference.

In this new lawsuit, Baltas is alleging that his due process rights were violated as guaranteed under CHRB rules, the 14th Amendment to the United State Constitution, and Article 1, Section 7 of the California Constitution.

Reached via email on Thursday, CHRB spokesperson Mike Marten responded to a request for comment on the just-filed suit by writing, “We have not received anything new, so the only matter we are involved in civilly with Mr. Baltas is [the already pending] matter.”

Baltas's Aug. 17 lawsuit gave the following timeline of events:

“Baltas had a horse called Noble Reflection scheduled to run in the 10th race at Santa Anita Park on May 8, 2022. A few hours before the race, one of Baltas' employees were seen on videotape administering an oral dose syringe into the horse's mouth.

“A syringe was subsequently recovered from a feed bag that was tested and had allegedly traces of Higenamine and Paeonol, which are organic liquids that are found naturally in Chinese herbs. Notably, after Noble Reflection was scratched from the race, it was tested and the test results were 'clean,' and neither Higenamine nor Paeonol were found in the horse.

“Based on the film footage of Noble Reflection, Santa Anita went back and reviewed footage of Baltas' trained horses from earlier dates and allegedly found 22 other times when a Baltas employee squirted a substance in a horse's mouth.

“Unlike the situation with Noble Reflection, there was no syringe found in the other 21 instances to be tested. Instead, the CHRB assumed the substance in the other 22 cases going back to April 15, 2022, was the same that was found in or on the outside of the syringe found on May 8, 2022. None of the 21 horses that raced ever tested positive for a Controlled or Prohibited Substance.

“On May 10, 2022, the Santa Anita and/or the CHRB and its agents went back retroactively to review videotaped footage of Baltas's horses from April 15, 2022, up through May 8, 2022, and allegedly saw 22 horses trained by Baltas receiving an orally administered liquid that they contend was X-Treme Air Boost, which is a product advertised for use in horses in the Santa Anita Condition Book.

“The CHRB has never explained its decision for going back in time to find violations in the past, and its conduct demonstrates that they and/or the Defendants herein intended to target Ballas to find as many violations as possible. Such conduct demonstrates malice and oppression on the part of the CHRB and its Agents.

“Although no syringe was located in the 22 other cases, the CHRB assumed the product was X-Treme Air Boost…. Because the ingredients in question are food which are expressly excepted under Rule 1843.5; that is they are not within the Statue or any ruling of this Court.

“Based on these facts, on May 10, 2022, Aidan Butler, [acting] on behalf of Santa Anita, notified Baltas that he was prevented from entering any horses at Santa Anita.

“On June 22, 2022, the CHRB filed an Ex Parte Application with the Stewards at the Los Alamitos Racetrack to refuse the entry of two horses trained by Baltas…. The Stewards at Los Alamitos summarily denied these two entrees without a hearing or any form of due process. The denial constituted a de facto summary suspension…

“Baltas has not been allowed to enter a horse in the State of California from May 8, 2022 through the present date, causing him harm. On June 29, 2022, Churchill Downs issued a de facto suspension to Ballas, a decision made, once again, without any due process. Baltas was treated by the Churchill Downs and the 23 Defendants as 'guilty,' based solely on an allegation, and without any consideration to the alleged harm he would suffer.

“Before June 21, 2022, [CHRB] Executive Director Scott Chaney represented [to Baltas] that any complaint filed by the CHRB against Baltas would not contain alleged violations related to prohibited substances.

“Then on June 21, 2022, the CHRB filed a 47-count complaint which, much to the surprise of [Baltas], not only contained 23 counts of violations of CHRB Rule I 843.5, but, contrary to the representations made by Chaney on behalf of the CHRB, but also contained 23 counts of violations of [the absolute insurer rule] which included references to Higenamine and Paeonol, plus one count of a violation of…Conduct Detrimental to Horse Racing.

“As a result of the CHRB's conduct, [the inability to enter horses has cost Baltas] many thousands if not hundreds of thousands of dollars, and [he] stands to lose many millions of dollars in damages in an amount to be determined at jury trial for lost earnings, the loss of clients who entrusted their horses training to him, and an irrevocable damage to his reputation.”

The lawsuit termed the CHRB's actions as “wildly excessive and disparate to any other trainer punishment imposed by the CHRB, and was obviously punitive in nature in that it would effectively terminate Baltas' career as a trainer. Others facing similar charges arising out of CHRB Rule 1843.5 in the past received far more lenient sentences, including monetary fines in lieu of a year-long license suspension.”

According to the lawsuit, Baltas arrived at the $12-million figure by combining $10 million in “special compensatory damages for monies already lost and for future damages in an amount commensurate with what Baltas would have earned if his reputation was not destroyed,” plus $2 million for “general damages in the form of emotional and psychological distress, pain and suffering, anxiety, stress, depression, worry, inconvenience.”

The post Alleging ‘Destroyed’ Reputation, Baltas Sues CHRB for $12 Million appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Three Jockeys to Become Test for Contested HISA Enforcement

The legal rabbit hole deepened on Tuesday in one of four lawsuits designed to derail the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act Authority (HISA), pulling jockeys Drayden Van Dyke, Miguel Vazquez and Edwin Gonzalez into the fray as plaintiffs alleged new harms resulting from rule enforcement they believe is in contempt of a court order.

Plaintiffs led by Louisiana, West Virginia, and the Jockeys' Guild moved for a federal judge to issue an immediate order to enforce its July 26 injunction to keep Guild-member jockeys from being subject to HISA rules nationwide. The plaintiffs also want the judge to make the HISA defendants explain to the court why they should not be held in contempt for “flagrantly violating this Court's injunction within a mere four days after this Court entered it.”

A series of filings Aug. 2 in United States District Court (Western District of Louisiana) centers on different interpretations the two sides have regarding what Judge Terry Doughty meant when he wrote in that July 26 injunction that, “The geographic scope of the injunction shall be limited to the states of Louisiana and West Virginia, and as to all Plaintiffs in this proceeding.”

The plaintiffs-most specifically, the Guild-believe the judge's words apply to “all of the members of the Jockeys' Guild, regardless of the U.S. jurisdiction in which the jockey is riding.”

The HISA defendants have steadfastly maintained that individual members of the Guild are clearly not plaintiffs in the lawsuit, and to consider them that way “would wreak havoc on the sport. For example, many jockeys are not Guild members, such that different rules would apply to jockeys riding in the same race.”

Separately, the defendants have made a formal motion asking for a clarification of the wording in the injunction, but the court docket indicates the judge might not offer one until next week, unless Doughty opts to expedite the matter.

And beyond that, the defendants' appeal of their turned-down request to put a stay on the entirety of the July 26 preliminary injunction is headed for the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Confused yet? There's more. This case is only one of four lawsuits initiated at the federal level this year to keep HISA rules from going into effect nationwide. The first two got tossed out by judges but are in the process of being appealed. The fourth just got filed on Monday in a Texas court.

According to Tuesday's filings, Guild-member jockeys Van Dyke, Vazquez and Gonzalez are just the first three jockeys that the plaintiffs believe are being harmed by the allegedly contemptuous enforcement of HISA safety rules.

“Though the ink has not yet dried on this Court's order preliminarily enjoining Defendants from enforcing HISA's unlawful rules, some Defendants have already decided that they need not follow the Order,” the filing stated. “[D]espite the Order's plain text, the Authority Defendants continue to implement and enforce the enjoined rules against members of Plaintiff Jockeys' Guild.”

According to the filings, on July 27, one day after the allegedly unclear order was issued, a HISA spokesperson stated that “HISA will continue to enforce its rules in all applicable jurisdictions, with the exception of Louisiana and West Virginia. Outside of those states, the court order applies only to the five individuals specifically named in the case.”

And on July 29, the filings stated, the California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) put out an advisory that stated, “Unless and until a federal court clarifies an earlier ruling by indicating otherwise, the CHRB will continue to honor its agreement with HISA by enforcing HISA safety rules, including the rules covering use of the riding crop, as the CHRB has been doing since HISA rules went into effect on July 1.”

Then on July 30, Del Mar stewards issued a ruling against Van Dyke for his use of the riding crop in a July 29 race that they deemed to be in violation of HISA Rule 2280, imposing a $250 fine and one-day suspension.

“The suspension is set to preclude Mr. Van Dyke from racing on Aug. 6, but he must confirm participation on Aug. 3 for that race day,” Tuesday's filing stated. “To be clear, Mr. Van Dyke is a member of Plaintiff Jockeys' Guild and thus Defendants are enjoined from implementing and enforcing the enjoined Racetrack Safety Rules against Mr. Van Dyke.”

The filing continued: “Compounding this problem, over the weekend, Plaintiffs were informed that the HISA stewards at Gulfstream Park in Hallandale, Florida plan to issue multiple rulings against members of Plaintiff Jockeys' Guild for similar violations.”

For actions during July 31 races, the filing stated, “HISA stewards intend to issue written rulings on Aug. 5 against Miguel Vazquez [for] a violation of enjoined HISA Rule 2280 that prohibits a jockey from raising his wrist above a certain point before striking a horse with his riding crop; and Edwin Gonzalez for a violation of enjoined HISA Rule 2280 for a different riding crop violation.”

Both Gulfstream jockeys are expected to receive fines of $250 each, one-day suspensions, and points to escalate penalties for subsequent violations.

“Through these continued enforcement actions, the Authority Defendants thus have made clear that they seek to enforce enjoined rules against Plaintiffs' members throughout the country outside of Louisiana and West Virginia,” the plaintiffs' filing stated.

The plaintiffs are asking the judge to award compensatory damages to cover the allegedly lost purse earnings that the above three riders will incur, plus a “coercive fine of $250 per day for each day any points assessed…as a result of HISA's contempt are not purged from their records.”

The Guild-backed plaintiffs also want those damages to apply to any other Guild members who get subsequently penalized while this issue is contested in the courts.

With regard to how the judge might rule in his clarification of the injunction, the plaintiffs noted in court documents that “nearly 50 years of Supreme Court case law” is on their side, because precedents confirm that “members of associations are entitled to the benefits that their associations obtain in litigation.”

In the overall lawsuit, the HISA Authority, the Federal Trade Commission, and board members and overseers of both entities are alleged to have violated the Fourth, Seventh and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution, plus the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which governs the process by which federal agencies develop and issue regulations. An adverse ruling against the defendants could mean a reopening of public commentary periods and a rewrite of all existing and in-the-pipeline HISA rules.

The post Three Jockeys to Become Test for Contested HISA Enforcement appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

CHRB Advances 90-Day Layoff Scrutiny Rules

With the aim of reducing the incidence of large-bone fractures, the California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) voted unanimously Thursday to advance two new rules that would require examinations and veterinary and training record disclosures for every horse that has not had a recorded work or a race within the past 90 days.

Citing the “concerning rate” of large-bone fractures in horses returning to training after extended periods, the CHRB meeting packet stated that, “An initial examination will be required by both a regulatory veterinarian and the attending veterinarian, including review of veterinary and training records for the previous 60-day period, prior to the horse going to the track to train.

“Additionally, a follow up examination will be required between 30 and 45 days. The goal is to provide a baseline examination and identify any at-risk factors that may predispose a horse from suffering a catastrophic injury related to the shins, tibias, shoulder, pelvis, etc…”

Also, amendments were advanced to clarify existing CHRB rules regarding the specific requirements of racing soundness examinations, including the condition of the horse when presented for examination, who must be present, and how the examination information will be recorded.

“These clarifications also establish consistent requirements for both racing soundness and training soundness examinations,” the CHRB analysis stated. “Additionally, requirements for veterinary treatment records are clarified, including the timeframe for trainers to submit records and the official veterinarian's responsibility to maintain the records.”

CHRB chairman Gregory Ferraro, DVM, said prior to the vote that the new regulations are “directed at long bone fractures of the shoulder and tibia. Horses that come to these injuries have a typical profile that we've identified. This particular regulation would address that profile and require examinations at specific times in order to prevent serious injury.”

The proposed rules now advance to a 45-day public comment period, which will be followed by a final CHRB vote.

The post CHRB Advances 90-Day Layoff Scrutiny Rules appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Baltas Hearing Rescheduled, Entries Denied by Los Al Stewards

Last month, the California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) issued a complaint against trainer Richard Baltas alleging that between Apr. 15 and May 8 this year, 23 horses in his care had been administered on race-day a substance containing the plant extracts higenamine and paenol in violation of the board's rules.

A hearing on the complaint, originally scheduled for early and then possibly late July, is now set for Aug. 3 with the Del Mar stewards beginning at 9 a.m., according to CHRB spokesperson, Mike Marten, in an email Friday afternoon.

In that same email, the CHRB wrote that Baltas–whose license remains active pending the hearing–had attempted to enter horses during the daytime Thoroughbred meet at Los Alamitos, but that the stewards denied those entries on June 28.

That meet runs June 25 through July 10.

The stewards' decision was based on two CHRB rules, one for good cause and the second giving stewards' discretion over entries and declarations, wrote Marten.

“All entries and declarations are under the supervision of the stewards, and they may, without notice, refuse the entries of any person or the transfer of any entries, and they may also, in their discretion, limit entries by providing that no horse shall be listed for more than one race in any one day,” CHRB Rule 1580 states.

According to Marten, Baltas has appealed that decision by the stewards, with an appeal hearing not yet scheduled.

The TDN reached out to Baltas by text but did not receive a response before publication.

According to the original complaint, surveillance video at Santa Anita caught Baltas' employees allegedly administering the substance to the horses on the days they were entered to race.

In California, trainers face tight restrictions about what medications and supplements can be given to a horse within 48 and 24 hours of a race.

A subsequent analysis of the substance by the University of California, Davis, allegedly found the presence of higenamine and paenol, both of which are plant extracts.

According to the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA), Higenamine is a chemical found in a variety of plants, and can act as an anti-asthmatic to open up airways.

Higenamine is also becoming more commonly found in dietary supplements for human athletes, as per USADA's website.

A CHRB investigation was triggered on May 8, when the Baltas-trained Noble perfection was a late scratch from the 10th race at Santa Anita.

At the same time, 1/ST Racing, which operates Santa Anita, banned the trainer from running and working horses at 1/ST-owned facilities. On May 7, the Baltas-trained Speedcuber suffered a sesamoid injury, and was euthanized two-days later.

Baltas had no runners at Santa Anita between 1/ST's announcement and the end of the meet, on June 19.

The post Baltas Hearing Rescheduled, Entries Denied by Los Al Stewards appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post