Rice Spars With NYRA Over Whether She Is a ‘Threat’

Linda Rice took a legal swat at both the New York Racing Association (NYRA) and the New York State Gaming Commission (NYSGC) with a court reply underscoring that her participation as a trainer (currently permitted because of a temporary injunction) poses no threat to anyone. This latest legal filing comes as Rice continues to try and get a three-year license revocation and $50,000 fine for “improper and corrupt conduct” overturned via the state's judicial system.

The Sept. 29 memorandum of law filed by Rice's legal team in Schenectady County Supreme Court directly addressed a friend-of-the-court brief filed by NYRA Sept. 9 that had sided with defendant NYSGC by arguing that Rice's presence as an admitted seeker and user of allegedly restricted race-entry info undermines the integrity of the sport.

“Ms. Rice is currently racing her horses in good standing at NYRA and other tracks, and she has been doing so for the entire six-year period following the end of her purported misconduct in March 2015,” the trainer's legal team wrote in the reply. “There is simply no reason why she cannot, or should not, continue to do so while this case is heard and determined. Ms. Rice is demonstrably not a threat to racing, and all concerned–the commission, NYRA, and the public–would be completely and entirely unaffected by a stay/preliminary injunction.”

NYRA had argued otherwise back on Sept. 9: “Put simply, the need to protect NYRA's patrons and the wagering public from the significant risk [Rice] poses to the fairness and integrity of Thoroughbred racing in New York State far outweighs any alleged hardships to [Rice's] business resulting from the suspension of her license,” the friend-of-the-court brief stated.

Rice's filing replied that, “Simply put, the status quo is, and has been for many years, inoffensive to the Commission, NYRA, and the public, so there is no valid reason or basis to deny Ms. Rice's application for a stay until the conclusion of these proceedings.”

Rice's filing stated that, “Like the Commission, NYRA does not dispute that, in the absence of injunctive relief barring enforcement of the Commission's Order pending the outcome of this matter, Ms. Rice will suffer irreparable harm: that is, the loss of her only source of income, the destruction of her business and reputation, and the laying-off of the 55 individuals who depend on her and her stable for employment, many of whom are supporting families.”

Rice's filing continued: “Nor does NYRA make any serious attempt to demonstrate how Ms. Rice is unlikely to succeed on the merits of her claims. Although NYRA asserts Ms. Rice cannot satisfy her burden of demonstrating likelihood of success on the merits, it does not explain why.”

On May 17, 2021, culminating an investigation that had stretched over five years, NYSGC members voted 5-0 to agree with a hearing officer that Rice's years-long pattern of seeking and obtaining pre-entry information from NYRA racing office workers was “intentional, serious and extensive [and] inconsistent with and detrimental to the best interests of horse racing.”

Rice had testified that she did nothing wrong by using inside sources to gain a competitive advantage over other trainers. When the penalty got handed down, Rice contended that it was “unduly harsh.”

The ban went into effect June 7. Two days later, Rice's legal team secured a temporary injunction from the court that has allowed her to resume training while the legal process plays out.

The NYSGC on July 2 asked the court to deny Rice's motion for a preliminary injunction “because Ms. Rice has not shown a likelihood of success on the merits or that the equities weigh in favor of preliminary injunctive relief.”

Rice's Sept. 29 filing addressed both of those points.

“As to the merits of Ms. Rice's claims, the Commission's finding that the race information at issue in this case was 'confidential' and unavailable to trainers is not supported by substantial evidence and must be vacated. The finding is premised on nothing more than self-serving, conclusory pronouncements of a supposed 'universal rule' under which the names and past performance information of horses entered in overnight races constitute 'confidential information'…

“Regarding the equities in this case, NYRA's amicus brief argues that Ms. Rice's application should be denied because the 'available evidence indicates that continuation of the status quo may itself pose a significant risk to the public.' This argument completely ignores the record proof, as well as the plain fact that there has never been any suggestion–by the Commission or NYRA–that Ms. Rice has engaged in any misconduct since March of 2015.”

Rice's filing continued: “as previously discussed in Ms. Rice's prior submissions, it is undisputed that the wagering public was totally unaffected by Ms. Rice's receipt of the racing information at issue in this case…

“Lastly, because the Commission's three-year revocation of Ms. Rice's license is so disproportionate to the purported offense, it is shocking to one's sense of fairness, constitutes an abuse of discretion on the part of the Commission as a matter of law, and must be vacated on that basis as well…

“No interested party–neither the Commission, NYRA, nor the public–will suffer any diminution in the integrity of racing, any appearance of impropriety, or any other undue hardship or burden if the preliminary injunction is issued,” Rice's filing summed up.

“The Commission simply would be compelled to maintain the status quo, which is, and has been for many years, inoffensive to the best interests of the sport and those who regulate it, participate in it, and enjoy it,” the filing stated.

The post Rice Spars With NYRA Over Whether She Is a ‘Threat’ appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Annual Belmont Stair Climb Tribute to 9/11 Firefighters Set to Return Oct. 17

After a year lost to the COVID-19 pandemic, the FDNY Stair Climb returns to Belmont Park on Sunday, October 17. This year's 7th annual event is part of the nationwide 9/11 stair climb program that pays tribute to the FDNY firefighters who died more than 20 years ago on 9/11. The climb benefits the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation (NFFF), which supports the families of fallen firefighters and the FDNY Counseling Service Unit.

“Twenty years later, I still remember what trauma looked like etched on the faces of firefighters at the World Trade Center site when a team from the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation and I arrived on scene September 12, 2001,” said Chief Ron Siarnicki, who is the NFFF executive director. “It's not something you can ever forget.”

The nation's inaugural FDNY stair climb to benefit the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation took place on September 11, 2005 when Colorado firefighters climbed 110 flights of stairs in Denver–each step commemorating the 110 stories of the World Trade Centers. The concept caught on around the country and became an annual event and in 2017, it moved to Belmont Park.

There are several ways to participate. You can register as an individual climber, team captain or team member here and can also can donate to a climber, a team or a team member. Gates and on-site registration will begin at 8:30 a.m. Oct. 17 at Belmont. The opening ceremony will be at 9:30 a.m., with the climb set from 10 a.m. to Noon. Participants are invited to a post-climb reception with food and entertainment and the day's racing card. Five races will be named in honor FDNY fallen heroes.

The fees are $50 for a climber (13 & up), which includes a t-shirt, badge & after party; $35 for a virtual climber (includes a t-shirt and virtual-climb toolkit); $35 for a virtual runner/walker, biker and gym stair climber (includes a t-shirt and virtual-climb toolkit; $50 for a climb supporter; and $20 for Kids, 4-12 (includes the after P=party, which is free for Children 3 & under.

The post Annual Belmont Stair Climb Tribute to 9/11 Firefighters Set to Return Oct. 17 appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

NYRA: New Procedures Are ‘Exactly’ What Baffert Asked For, Hearing Pushed To Oct. 11

Last week, Hall of Famer Bob Baffert's attorneys filed a letter with U.S. District Judge Carol Bagley Amon requesting she hold the New York Racing Association in contempt for scheduling a hearing. NYRA fired back at Baffert in court on Wednesday, reports the Thoroughbred Daily News, arguing that the new hearing procedures are exactly what the trainer argued he was entitled to when filing his lawsuit.

NYRA notified Baffert ahead of the Belmont Stakes that it was suspending his ability to enter horses in races or have stall space at its racetracks due to his recent history of medication violations (five over a one-year period), the conflicting statements he provided to media around the Medina Spirit scandal, and Churchill Downs' suspension of the trainer.

Judge Amon of the Eastern District of New York determined that NYRA's suspension of Baffert should not have taken place without some sort of hearing allowing him to address the organization's accusations against him. Although NYRA was asserting its private property rights in the case, Amon said the organization is closely entwined enough with the state that its suspension of Baffert constituted a state action, thereby requiring due process.

NYRA issued a statement of charges against Baffert and fellow trainer Marcus Vitali on Sept. 10, and scheduled a hearing for Baffert to begin on Sept. 27. However, that hearing was delayed until Oct. 11 as Baffert's attorney requested additional time. The trainer will not be participating on that date, because the first hearing will be about scheduling future dates and deadlines.

The Sept. 29 filing by NYRA reads: “Plaintiff moves to hold NYRA in contempt for providing Plaintiff exactly what he argued he was entitled to in support of his motion for a preliminary injunction–notice and an opportunity to be heard.

“Plaintiff incorrectly asserts that the Notice of Hearing, Hearing Rules and Procedures, and Statement of Charges demonstrate that, 'NYRA's conduct is simply a repackaged version of the same action already enjoined. What the Hearing Rules and Procedures and Statement of Charges actually show is a substantially different process that is now in place, which was not afforded in connection with the May 17 suspension that the Court enjoined.”

“Plaintiff's speculation that NYRA created its Hearing Rules and Procedures to target him is incorrect,” the filing continued. “The Hearing Rules and Procedures are of general applicability and are designed to afford the process this Court deemed necessary in its Order.”

Read more at the Thoroughbred Daily News.

An archive of stories about Baffe

Additional stories about Baffert's Kentucky Derby positive and ensuing legal battles can be found here.

The post NYRA: New Procedures Are ‘Exactly’ What Baffert Asked For, Hearing Pushed To Oct. 11 appeared first on Horse Racing News | Paulick Report.

Source of original post

NYRA to Court: A Hearing Was ‘Exactly’ What Baffert Had Argued For

The New York Racing Association (NYRA) told a federal judge Wednesday that it shouldn't face “contempt of court” allegations initiated last week by trainer Bob Baffert because NYRA has been fully compliant with a July court order that–by NYRA's interpretation–should allow its scheduled hearing on Baffert's exclusion from its tracks to proceed.

NYRA is already defending itself in a federal lawsuit initiated by the Hall of Fame trainer with the well-publicized history of equine drug positives over whether or not NYRA violated Baffert's constitutional rights by trying to ban him outright without any type of hearing back on May 17.

On July 14, the United States District Court (Eastern District of New York) granted Baffert a preliminary injunction that allowed him to race at New York's three major tracks pending the resolution of his overall case.

While that ruling clearly allowed Baffert to start horses at Saratoga Race Course, Belmont Park and Aqueduct, NYRA additionally took the judge's order to mean the association could move forward with drafting a set of procedures for holding hearings that could suspend licensees who engage in injurious conduct.

After those rules were made public, NYRA, on Sept. 10, wrote a letter summoning Baffert to appear at just such a videoconference hearing.

On Sept. 22, Baffert filed a motion asking a federal judge to hold NYRA in civil contempt for trying to schedule any sort of hearing that could once again bar him from participating at NYRA's tracks. That filing stated that, “NYRA seems to believe now that it can simply offer a sham hearing and get around the Court's ruling by creating rules after the fact.”

One week later, NYRA's Sept. 29 filing hit back at that assertion: “Plaintiff moves to hold NYRA in contempt for providing Plaintiff exactly what he argued he was entitled to in support of his motion for a preliminary injunction–notice and an opportunity to be heard.

“Plaintiff incorrectly asserts that the Notice of Hearing, Hearing Rules and Procedures, and Statement of Charges demonstrate that, 'NYRA's conduct is simply a repackaged version of the same action already enjoined,'” the filing continued. “What the Hearing Rules and Procedures and Statement of Charges actually show is a substantially different process that is now in place, which was not afforded in connection with the May 17 suspension that the Court enjoined.”

NYRA's filing continued: “Because NYRA at all times acted in good faith to comply with the Order, and Plaintiff has not demonstrated that the harsh tool of contempt should be wielded here, the Court should deny the requested relief. Indeed, NYRA's actions that are at issue were undertaken in compliance with the Order and provide Plaintiff what he asked for–a hearing during which he could present his side of the story…

“Plaintiff's speculation that NYRA created its Hearing Rules and Procedures to target him is incorrect,” the filing continued. “The Hearing Rules and Procedures are of general applicability and are designed to afford the process this Court deemed necessary in its Order.”

NYRA argued in its filing that it should neither be held in contempt nor have a cease and desist order levied against it prohibiting the association from taking any action to potentially suspend Baffert.

The filing contended that's “because Plaintiff has failed to meet his heavy burden to show any of the three elements for contempt: 1) a clear and unambiguous prohibition in the Order barring NYRA from establishing and utilizing a hearing process with respect to Plaintiff; 2) clear and convincing proof that NYRA violated the Order; and 3) evidence that NYRA has not diligently attempted to comply with the Order in a reasonable manner.”

Baffert had requested that the court “admonish NYRA for its behavior” and immediately order it to 1) Cease and desist from all conduct concerning or relating in any way to any suspension of Baffert until after the full conclusion of the case; 2) Pay a $5,000 fine for each day that it does not comply with the court's directives; 3) Reimburse Baffert for attorneys' fees and court costs related to the new motion for contempt.”

Again, NYRA disagreed.

“Finally, even if the Court were to find that NYRA's actions were inconsistent with the Order, Plaintiff should not be awarded attorneys' fees and costs as a consequence of NYRA's good faith attempt to comply with the Order,” the Sept. 29 filing summed up. “The Court likewise should not impose the daily fines that Plaintiff seeks because no harm has resulted from NYRA's actions and because such fines are unnecessary to ensure NYRA's continued compliance with its Order.”

Baffert's videoconference before a hearing officer was supposed to have taken place Sept. 27.

But exhibits that NYRA attached to its filing show emails from earlier this month in which Baffert's attorney requested more time. With the hearing officer's permission, that hearing date was pushed back to Oct. 11.

It was also revealed that Baffert will not be required to testify or participate in the video hearing on that date because this first session will be all about scheduling future dates and setting deadlines for things such as the filing of witness lists and evidence exhibits.

The post NYRA to Court: A Hearing Was ‘Exactly’ What Baffert Had Argued For appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Verified by MonsterInsights