Vince Baker | Horse Racing Free Tips

Several California Racetrack Vets Put on Probation by Vet Med Board

Over the last few months, several California backstretch veterinarians have been placed on probationary periods by the California Veterinary Medical Board (CVMB) for alleged problems in their practice of veterinary medicine.

The latest backstretch veterinarians to face such disciplinary actions are Vince Baker, placed on probation for four years, and Sarah Graybill Jones, placed on a three-year probationary period. The effective date for both probationary periods was Aug. 21.

These disciplinary actions signify an ongoing conundrum for backstretch veterinarians in California, who have found themselves afoul of the CVMB for veterinary procedures and approaches that are deemed legal under the California Horse Racing Board's (CHRB) rules.

Baker and Graybill Jones are two of six Southern California-based backstretch veterinarians who have been placed on probation by the CVMB so far this year. The veterinary medical board has filed complaints against at least another 15 backstretch veterinarians.

The various complaints and accusations against California's backstretch veterinarians are similar in nature and reflect a yawning schism between the veterinary board and the CHRB concerning approaches to standard equine veterinary care.

The main areas of conflict surround what the CVMB deems prescribing and dispensing medications or treatments without an examination or forming a diagnosis, how to define the proper veterinarian-client-patient relationship (VCPR) on a racetrack backstretch, and the prophylactic use of medications.

The CHRB has updated its rules on compounded drugs with the aim of clarifying another area of disagreement with the VMB.

Several equine veterinary experts have said that a key part of the conflict surrounds the Veterinary Medicine Practice Act–the overarching rules by which all licensed veterinarians must comport their business–which is almost entirely geared around small animal practice, and therefore is unrepresentative of the practicalities of herd health on a racetrack backstretch.

In an effort to resolve the differences between the two agencies, veteran equine veterinarian Barrie Grant was appointed to the VMB earlier this year by California Governor, Gavin Newsom. The veterinary board has also established an Equine Practice Subcommittee.

Baker is the long-time veterinarian for Bob Baffert, trainer of Medina Spirit, who finished first in the 2021 G1 Kentucky Derby, only to be disqualified due to a post-race betamethasone positive. The following December, Medina Spirit suffered a sudden cardiac death during training.

Due to the high-profile litigation surrounding Medina Spirit's disqualification from the Kentucky Derby, and the horse's subsequent death, the CVMB's disciplinary actions Baker, Medina Spirit's track vet, have proven a lightening-rod on social media.

The CVMB accused Baker of several causes of discipline including alleged negligence in the practice of veterinary medicine, the “dispensing of dangerous drugs without medical necessity,” prescribing “controlled substances without medical necessity,” and failure to establish VCPR.

The TDN reached out Friday morning to attorney Lisa Brown, who represents Baker, for comment. Brown has not yet responded.

The post Several California Racetrack Vets Put on Probation by Vet Med Board appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Vaccarezzas’ $1.5M-Plus Veterinary Negligence Win Vacated

A judge in the LA County Superior Court of California has reversed a February jury verdict that awarded Carlo and Priscilla Vaccarezza more than $1.5 million in veterinary malpractice and negligence damages against the Equine Medical Center and veterinarian Vince Baker, according to a ruling dated Thursday.

The case surrounds the treatment that Baker gave to the Vaccarezza owned and trained Little Alexis, before she finished ninth in the 2014 GI Filly & Mare Sprint at Santa Anita.

“I think it's a great result. Dr. Baker is a fabulous veterinarian,” said attorney Lisa J. Brown, who represents Baker. “This case should never have been filed and it should never have gotten this far. It's a shame that this was the approach that the Vaccarezzas took.”

According to James Morgan, who represents the Vaccarezzas, the plaintiffs will appeal the ruling.

“We have trust in the jury's objective consideration of all the evidence that initially resulted in a verdict in favor of the Vaccarezzas. We intend to request the assistance of the court of appeal to confirm the merits of the jury's carefully considered findings,” Morgan wrote, in a text.

Two days before the Breeders' Cup race, Baker administered a treatment of permitted pre-race medications–including the anti-inflammatory Ketofen, electrolytes and a vitamin jug–intravenously into Little Alexis's left jugular, as per coverage of the jury verdict.

One day later, a lump had appeared on Little Alexis's neck at the site where the catheter had been inserted. She had also spiked a temperature.

Baker treated the horse for her elevated temperature and drew blood for testing. By the morning of the race, Little Alexis's temperature had dropped and Baker gave her the all-clear to race.

After the race, however, Little Alexis's condition deteriorated again, preventing her from flying from California to the Fasig-Tipton November Sale in Kentucky as planned. She had been appraised for $1.5 million as a stakes-winning racing prospect.

Kept in training, Little Alexis never again competed in graded stakes, and was ultimately sold for $440,000.

The Vaccarezzas' original complaint was filed in 2015 and alleged medical and general negligence. Vaccarezza also claimed that months after he filed the original complaint, he learned that Little Alexis's blood test results taken the morning before the race showed abnormalities.
Vaccarezza claimed that Baker failed to tell him of the abnormal blood test results, and that his “standard of care” for Little Alexis fell short of that for the veterinary medical profession.

In February, a 12-person jury sided with the plaintiffs, awarding them $1.06 million plus interest in damages, for a total of more than $1.5 million.

The defendants in the case subsequently filed two post-trial motions, one for a new trial and a motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict.

In his Thursday ruling, judge Richard Burdge reversed the jury verdict, writing that the “Plaintiffs did not present substantial evidence that an average veterinarian of ordinary skill would have treated the facts of this case differently and did not establish a relevant, recognized standard of care in California at the relevant time. Therefore, the finding of veterinary negligence is not supported by substantial evidence and the JNOV motion is granted.”

Judge Burdge also denied the motion for a new trial. According to Morgan, the judge also denied a motion for diminished damages.
Central to judge Burdge's ruling was that he found a key expert witness for the Vaccarezzas had testified to personal veterinary standards rather than to the standard of care among veterinarians in California in general.

In the February trial, veterinarian Michael Chovanes said, for example, that an important reading in the blood test—pertaining to the SAA value, which measures a protein synthesized by the liver that increases dramatically with inflammation—was significantly elevated.

This was one of the reasons why Little Alexis should have been scratched from the Breeders' Cup, Chovanes testified at the February trial, calling the decision to run her a “significant risk.”

In his Thursday ruling, however, judge Burdge writes that Chovanes “was never asked, and he did not testify, that essentially every 'veterinarian of ordinary skill and knowledge from the relevant community' would give that same answer or balance the risks and interests involved in exactly the same way.”

Judge Burdge adds in the written ruling: “If another qualified practitioner in the exercise of professional judgment might have answered that question differently, Dr. Chovanes' answer does not establish a standard to which any other practitioner must always adhere.”

Judge Burdge's ruling was based on relatively limited information, while an appellate court would have access to the full trial transcript, said Morgan, in a telephone call.

“I can't fault the trial court for not having a complete copy of the transcript. He called it the way he saw it. The jurors called it the way they saw it. And I trust the court of appeal process,” said Morgan, who added that the Vaccarezzas have not yet filed an appeal, and that such a trial “won't be soon.”

According to Brown, the original jury verdict was “inconsistent” with the law, as the expert testimony, based on “personal preference,” was insufficient to establish liability.

“They ignored the evidence that the horse returned to racing and there was no evidence that any downfall in [Little Alexis's] ability to run had anything to do with what doctor Baker did,” said Brown.

The post Vaccarezzas’ $1.5M-Plus Veterinary Negligence Win Vacated appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Vaccarezzas Win $1M Veterinary Negligence Jury Verdict

Carlo and Priscilla Vaccarezza won a $1.06-million jury award in a California court Feb. 25 over a veterinary malpractice and negligence lawsuit against the Equine Medical Center and Dr. Vince Baker, who is the longtime attending veterinarian for trainer Bob Baffert.

The case dates to the 2014 Breeders' Cup and a filly the Vaccarezzas owned and trained, Little Alexis. The couple alleged that she was mistreated by Baker for a lump on her jugular vein and cleared to race. Not only did Little Alexis finish ninth in the GI Filly & Mare Sprint at Santa Anita Park, but her condition became so grave that she was unable to fly to Kentucky right after the Breeders' Cup to sell as planned at the Fasig-Tipton November Sale.

The Vaccarezzas kept her in training, but Little Alexis never again competed in graded stakes. She had been appraised for $1.5 million as a stakes-winning racing prospect who was competitive in Grade I races, but later sold for far less than that amount, at $440,000.

The jury's award represents the difference in valuation from actual sales price, and the defendants will also be on the hook for interest accrued since Nov. 3, 2014, the date Little Alexis would have been sold.

“The case probably sent a message loud and clear that we need to hold vets accountable for their actions,” owner/trainer Carlo Vaccarezza told TDN via phone Tuesday.

“Number one, [Baker] put my filly at risk to get an aneurism or a heart attack,” Vaccarezza said. “Number two, he put the other horses at risk if she broke down. Number three, he put my jockey Joel Rosario at risk. Number four, he put all the other jockeys at risk.

“And number five, not only that, he defrauded the public because they bet over $5 million on that race, and Dr. Baker was the only person who knew that that filly was sick. The public didn't know she was sick. They didn't know she had no shot in the race,” Vaccarezza said.

Asked to comment on behalf of her client, Baker's attorney, Lisa Brown, told TDN via email that, “We believe the case was incorrectly decided and are reviewing all options for further action.”

James Morgan, the lawyer for the Vaccarezzas, told TDN via email that the rapid verdict (after just 2 1/4 hours of jury deliberation) for the full amount of damages requested is a “confirmation as to how the real world will insist on 'accountability.'

“Some battles need to be fought,” Morgan continued. “Of all the battles in and around the horse industry, this was the most satisfying…. It is a victory for those who cherish shining the light on the truth and a defeat for those who choose to harm others by keeping them in the dark by hiding important information.”

Morgan noted that the current controversies surrounding trainer Bob Baffert weren't allowed to be communicated to jurors as they pondered the fate of the veterinarian who for decades has been closely associated with the immensely successful but recently equine-drug troubled trainer.

“The jury received no information about the connection between Dr. Baker and Bob Baffert, Medina Spirit, the 73 pages of accusations filed by the Attorney General for the California Veterinary Medical Board, or the issues pertaining to Dr. [Jeff] Blea,” Morgan wrote. “All the jury heard was the facts of this case.”

Those facts, as alleged in the suit first filed in 2015 in Los Angeles County Superior Court, date to Oct. 31, 2014, the day before Little Alexis was scheduled to start in the Breeders' Cup. The 3-year-old filly had an elevated temperature and Vaccarezza noticed a bump on her left jugular vein.

Baker agreed to treat Little Alexis, and advised the groom to apply hot and cold packs for the bump, Morgan told TDN. Vaccarezza said Baker took a blood sample but did not actually tell him any tests were being done.

Morgan said it would be nearly two years–long after the alleged miscommunication occurred and well after the initial lawsuit was filed–before either he or Vaccarezza learned that Baker had actually gotten test results back the same day they were taken but still didn't mention them to Vaccarezza.

“Instead, on Nov. 1, the morning of the race, Mr. Vaccarezza asked Dr. Baker if Little Alexis would be good to run and reminded him that she would fly out the next morning to be sold at auction in Kentucky,” Morgan explained. “Dr. Baker responded that the filly is good to run. At no point did Dr. Baker tell Mr. Vaccarezza about the complete blood count (CBC) or the serum amyloid A (SAA) test results.”

Morgan argued in court that the CBC was “high and abnormal.” The SAA Value (which measures a protein synthesized by the liver that increases dramatically with inflammation) was an alarming 2,534, far outside a healthy horse's normal range of 0 to 15.

“By concealing the test results, attention was deflected away from the jugular vein issue,” Morgan wrote.

Experts who testified on behalf of the plaintiffs stated that they had never seen an SAA level that high.

“The horse had an inflammatory process going on and the standard of care would have been to advise the owner of the results and scratch the horse,” Morgan wrote.

After Little Alexis beat only one horse in the Filly & Mare Sprint, her temperature spiked again and the jugular bump grew much larger.

“When she came back from the race, she had a 104.7 fever. It's amazing she didn't drop dead,” Vaccarezza said.

With that high a fever, the filly could not get a health certificate to fly out the next morning to sell as hip number 150 at the Fasig-Tipton sale.

The Vaccarezzas gave Little Alexis a five-month break and she returned to racing in April at Gulfstream Park. She ran second, fourth and second in non-graded stakes, then won her final start, the Barely Even H., June 20, 2015.

“The jugular issue would get larger whenever she was asked to go at full speed,” Morgan explained.

Little Alexis sold to WinStar Farm at the Fasig-Tipton mixed sale in November 2015 for $440,000.

Morgan wrote that the exact amount of money coming to the Vaccarezzas via the court judgment will be finalized after the parties “haggle over” the awarding of costs associated with the verdict.

“It was impressive to me how this jury of 12 individuals, none of which had ever seen a horse race, went about their assigned tasks,” Morgan wrote. “Juries typically protect and preserve issues that resonate with them as pertinent to public health and safety. The universal safety standard applicable in our case was that health care professionals must disclose all abnormal test results.

“The unknown back story is that originally this case was based solely on the left jugular vein injury,” Morgan explained. “We were over a year and a half into the case before we obtained a copy of those test results through discovery. The case then changed, and focus was on the nondisclosure of the abnormal CBC and the humongous 2,534 SAA.

“”The negligence claim focused on Dr. Baker's choice to hide the adverse test results from Carlo,” Morgan wrote. “Those results had been concealed. That is negligence. The horse would have been scratched and neither harm to the horse nor damages to the Vaccarezzas would have occurred if the results had been disclosed.”

Morgan also offered a prediction on the defendants' next move.

“In what others have referred to as a 'well-worn playbook,' the predicable next play is to undermine the jurors' verdict, seek immunity from accountability, and to brazenly proclaim vindication will be theirs on appeal,” Morgan wrote.

“Needlessly risking the health and safety of any horse by keeping adverse test results hidden is not the message the public needs to hear…again,” Morgan wrote. “Acknowledging responsibility and accepting the consequences is better for the industry and public perceptions after an avoidable loss occurs.”

Vaccarezza put it this way: “We needed to win [the case] because we need to clear the sport. There's so much pollution and we have to get to the bottom of this. This is a phenomenal, phenomenal sport and we're given bad press every single day. My solution: If a trainer gets 30 days [suspended], the owner should get 30 days, and the vet should get 30 days. You put those rules in place and I guarantee you that people will stop these shenanigans.”

The post Vaccarezzas Win $1M Veterinary Negligence Jury Verdict appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post