NYS RWB suspends R. Dutrow's license for 10 years

[pointman]

Originally Posted by postpicker

There are claims that Sabini being involved is a conflict of interest because Sabini was the Treasurer of ARCI when Ed Martin, President and CEO of ARCI, sent a letter to NYSRWB in February asking that state look into revoking Dutrow's license. So how can Dutrow get a fair hearing if one of the judges is involved in an organization (ARCI) that was asking to revoke license. Dutrow's lawyer asked that Sabini recuse himself from the process and Sabini refused. So if it is proven that Dutrow was denied due process because of conflict of interest, he will win appeal and then chances are, he can sue and get damages for what happened to him because he has been harmed by losing owners, horses, etc because of this ruling.

The conflict is interesting, but it does not address the substance of the numerous violations which led to the imposition of the penalty. A license for anything issued by a State is a privilege, not a right. Therefore, the revoking agency is accorded a wide range of discretion. The appeals court is limited to a determination as to whether there was substantial evidence to support the findings made as opposed to being arbitrary or capricious.

Dutrow will have the burden of demonstrating that the conflict violated his due process rights to a fair hearing (and frankly administrative hearings in New York are not fair to begin with, they tend to almost always be stacked against the respondent). Even if he can overcome that hurdle, he then has to overcome the substantial evidence of the rules he has broken.

Dutrow's chances of overcoming both those hurdles are slim. As Chuck said, Dutrow has a better chance of convincing a court that the penalty is unduly harsh considering the level of evidence introduced against him. Even then, the Court is unlikely to act unless it finds the penalty shocks the Court's sense of fairness.

Dutrow may get a stay of the revocation pending appeals since he will be given the benefit of the doubt, but considering the number of violations his chances on appeal are slim IMO. Though the penalty is a stringent one, considering Dutrow's history of violations in NY and elsewhere, he may even have a hard time getting a reduction from the Courts.

[postpicker]

Originally Posted by pointman

The conflict is interesting, but it does not address the substance of the numerous violations which led to the imposition of the penalty. A license for anything issued by a State is a privilege, not a right. Therefore, the revoking agency is accorded a wide range of discretion. The appeals court is limited to a determination as to whether there was substantial evidence to support the findings made as opposed to being arbitrary or capricious.

Dutrow will have the burden of demonstrating that the conflict violated his due process rights to a fair hearing (and frankly administrative hearings in New York are not fair to begin with, they tend to almost always be stacked against the respondent). Even if he can overcome that hurdle, he then has to overcome the substantial evidence of the rules he has broken.

Dutrow's chances of overcoming both those hurdles are slim. As Chuck said, Dutrow has a better chance of convincing a court that the penalty is unduly harsh considering the level of evidence introduced against him. Even then, the Court is unlikely to act unless it finds the penalty shocks the Court's sense of fairness.

Dutrow may get a stay of the revocation pending appeals since he will be given the benefit of the doubt, but considering the number of violations his chances on appeal are slim IMO. Though the penalty is a stringent one, considering Dutrow's history of violations in NY and elsewhere, he may even have a hard time getting a reduction from the Courts.

No one can deny Dutrow deserved a suspension. But they will argue the cards were stacked against him from the start. No matter what the crime is, a person deserves due process. They will argue, why did ARCI try and get rid of Dutrow, why not other trainers in other states who may have a record just as bad if not worse than Dutrow. Will ARCI go after Asmussen or O'Neill or Mullins or Lake or anyone else if they have a violation. ARCI set a dangerous precedent and if they dont go after others like they did Dutrow, then they are helping Dutrow's case.

[pointman]

Originally Posted by postpicker

No one can deny Dutrow deserved a suspension. But they will argue the cards were stacked against him from the start. No matter what the crime is, a person deserves due process. They will argue, why did ARCI try and get rid of Dutrow, why not other trainers in other states who may have a record just as bad if not worse than Dutrow. Will ARCI go after Asmussen or O'Neill or Mullins or Lake or anyone else if they have a violation. ARCI set a dangerous precedent and if they dont go after others like they did Dutrow, then they are helping Dutrow's case.

I agree that Sabini should have recused himself and that he has possibly given Dutrow an issue where none should exist. However, the poster's suggestion that I responded to was that the odds were that Dutrow will ultimately prevail which is something that I strongly disagree with, conflict or not.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by postpicker

No one can deny Dutrow deserved a suspension. But they will argue the cards were stacked against him from the start. No matter what the crime is, a person deserves due process. They will argue, why did ARCI try and get rid of Dutrow, why not other trainers in other states who may have a record just as bad if not worse than Dutrow. Will ARCI go after Asmussen or O'Neill or Mullins or Lake or anyone else if they have a violation. ARCI set a dangerous precedent and if they dont go after others like they did Dutrow, then they are helping Dutrow's case.

None of those guys have a record like Dutrow. He has personal violations and he has been refused a license already. The ARCI can suggest whatever they want as they have no jurisdiction. As far as we know it was Ed Martin's opinion. So if I wrote an editorial for the Bloodhorse saying I think Dutrow should get his license revoked does that mean because Sabini may have read it and because we are both licensed members of the NYSRWB that he has to recuse himself? If the ARCI makes a statement about medication (which they have on numerous occasions) then does every commissioner have to recuse themselve from every instance of a medication violation in their individual states?

[King Glorious]

Trainer Richard Dutrow Jr. on Wednesday received a stay of a 10-year suspension handed down last month by the New York State Racing and Wagering Board that will likely remain in force until his appeal of the board’s decision is resolved.

New York Supreme Court Judge Richard Giardino granted the stay after Dutrow’s attorney, Michael Koenig, submitted paperwork to the court challenging the 10-year ban. Dutrow had earlier received a 30-day stay of the ban after his attorney informed the court that he intended to appeal the board’s decision. The 30-day stay was set to expire on Wednesday.

The stay will allow Dutrow to train while his appeal remains unresolved. In similar cases, appeals have taken at least six months to be resolved, and they usually stretch beyond 12 months.
“We’re looking forward to challenging the board’s decision and presenting our case,” said Koenig, shortly after returning from the court.

Technically, the stay was extended until Monday, in order to give the state time to prepare a request to move the appeal to the state’s appellate court, which, in New York, is higher than the Supreme Court. The stay granted by Giardino on Wednesday contains language that will extend the stay on Monday until the appeal is resolved.