Flurry of Legal Filings, Familiar Arguments in Baffert vs. NYRA Case

Both plaintiff Bob Baffert and defendant the New York Racing Association (NYRA) traded volleys of legal filings that were posted electronically just before 6 p.m. Tuesday. They all relate to Baffert's ongoing quest to fight NYRA's attempts to either banish him outright or to give him a hearing that would adjudicate the “detrimental conduct” charges NYRA has levied against Baffert over the repeated equine drug positives in his trainees.

NYRA on Oct. 12 filed a memorandum of law in support of its earlier motion to dismiss Counts I, III, IV and V of Baffert's federal lawsuit against NYRA. That civil complaint was initiated when NYRA tried to exclude Baffert from racing or stabling at its three tracks without any hearing process back on May 17.

“NYRA moves to dismiss all counts except Plaintiff's [civil action for deprivation of rights] claim. Counts I, III, IV and V of the Complaint fail to meet the applicable pleading requirements and, as such, should be dismissed as a matter of law,” NYRA stated in its filing in United States District Court (Eastern District of New York).

The filing continued: “First, this Court should dismiss Plaintiff's tortious interference with business relations claim because Plaintiff fails to allege either that NYRA directed conduct at any entity or individual other than himself or any specific business relationships with which NYRA purposefully interfered.

“Second, under the New York Court of Appeals' decision in Saumell v. New York Racing Association, Inc., Plaintiff's claim alleging a violation of New York law fails because NYRA acted upon its common law right of exclusion in suspending Plaintiff and because NYRA is not bound by the New York State Gaming Commission's hearing procedures when excluding a licensee from the Racetracks.

“Third, Plaintiff's claims for injunctive and declaratory relief likewise fail because they constitute remedies, not independent causes of action,” NYRA's filing stated.

Baffert's legal team rebutted those points in its own Oct. 12 filing, then launched into a separate argument about the exclusion hearing process that NYRA created to give Baffert a chance to present his own evidence and dispute the reasons that NYRA wants to bar him (Baffert is currently allowed to race at NYRA tracks because a judge ruled in his favor with a July 14 preliminary injunction).

“Rather than accepting this Court's Order and its defeat, NYRA has chosen to double down,” Baffert's filing contended.

“First, NYRA has filed the current meritless Motion to Dismiss. Second, NYRA sent Baffert another letter Sept. 10, 2021, which claimed that NYRA intended to once again suspend Baffert for the exact same conduct that it previously attempted to suspend him.”

Baffert's filing continued: “In an effort to circumvent this Court's injunction Order, NYRA claims its latest attempt to suspend is “new.” In reality, there is nothing “new” about it as it is based on the same conduct and reasoning. The only thing different is that NYRA has now created 'Hearing Rules and Procedures' out of whole cloth in attempt to retroactively instill legitimacy to its blatantly unlawful actions.

“These rules and procedures state that NYRA can appoint its own hearing officer, render whatever decision it deems appropriate, and deny Baffert any right to appeal. In other words, in response to this Court's ruling that it acted unlawfully, NYRA has decided to engage in even more unlawful activity. NYRA's recent actions make it highly likely that Baffert will suffer additional injuries to his business and reputation,” Baffert's filing stated.

NYRA wasn't through yet with the legal filings on Tuesday. In its response to Baffert's response, it fired back with another memorandum, this one in “further” support of its own motion to dismiss.

NYRA's second filing on Tuesday urged the court to “reject” Baffert's “novel” theory about tortious interference. It also stated that Baffert “mischaracterizes New York law” and that his argument “ignored the weight of authority” with regard to injunctive and declaratory relief.”

The post Flurry of Legal Filings, Familiar Arguments in Baffert vs. NYRA Case appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Jockeys’ Guild Begins Legal Action Pertaining to New Jersey Crop Use

In light of the New Jersey Racing Commission (NJRC)’s decision and applicable new regulation to eliminate the use of the riding crop but for safety purposes in Thoroughbred racing, the Jockeys’ Guild has retained the services of Rivkin Radler LLP in Hackensack, N.J., to take legal action. A notice of appeal of the Commission’s new regulation was filed on Nov. 5, 2020, in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

As the organization representing jockeys throughout the U.S., the safety of both equine and human athletes are paramount and of the upmost importance to the Jockeys’ Guild. According to the organization, the Jockeys’ Guild and its members are adamantly opposed to any animal abuse, and any person who does so should be fully punished for such occurrences. However, the jockeys must be afforded the discretion to use the riding crop in a responsible manner to safely control the horse and do what is in the best interest of the integrity of the sport.

A Steward will determine when a jockey has violated the new rule and the extent of the fine or sanction, which Jockeys’ Guild believes is unfair and subject to enhanced–not reduced–safety concerns. “We strongly believe the rule adopted by the New Jersey Racing Commission will have serious consequences and could result in even greater risks and dangers for both the horses and jockeys,” said Guild Co-Chairman, John Velazquez. “There are many instances when we need to be able to use the riding crop to prevent a dangerous situation from occurring that is not able to be seen or known by those who are not on the horse’s back. While purported to focus on the welfare of the horse, by not considering these instances, the new rule actually disregards the safety of the jockey and the horse.”

The Guild is extremely disappointed by the actions taken by the NJRC. The Guild believes its comments and concerns were not considered and that the NJRC insisted on rushing to adopt a rule that the Guild strongly believes is not only unsafe for the horse and jockey, but also a dangerous precedent and inconsistent with any other jurisdiction in the U.S.

“We believe the Commission failed to have any meaningful dialogue or recognize any input from us as the jockeys who are risking our lives,” said Guild board member and long-time New Jersey jockey Joe Bravo. “We feel that the Commission completely ignored our pleas for compromise, which is disrespectful and disheartening.”

The post Jockeys’ Guild Begins Legal Action Pertaining to New Jersey Crop Use appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Verified by MonsterInsights