|
|
12-10-2021, 05:01 PM
|
#1
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 5,803
|
Court Overrules CHRB -- Justify Matter to Go Forward
See attached letter from Darrell Vienna
|
|
|
12-10-2021, 06:29 PM
|
#2
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 20,613
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Asaro
See attached letter from Darrell Vienna
|
Wow!
This could get very interesting. How are they going to handle the Triple Crown implications?
__________________
"Unlearning is the highest form of learning"
Last edited by classhandicapper; 12-10-2021 at 06:30 PM.
|
|
|
12-10-2021, 06:39 PM
|
#3
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 5,803
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by classhandicapper
Wow!
This could get very interesting. How are they going to handle the Triple Crown implications?
|
I hope Ruiz gets an insane amount of money. CHRB sucks
|
|
|
12-10-2021, 10:43 PM
|
#4
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 5,870
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by classhandicapper
Wow!
This could get very interesting. How are they going to handle the Triple Crown implications?
|
Is Ruis saying he was defrauded out of the Triple Crown...thats a reach.
|
|
|
12-11-2021, 08:15 AM
|
#5
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 5,803
|
A couple points
This episode was one more instance that points to Baffert taking an edge and I doubt what was found in Justify is what he cheats with IMO
One more example of the CHRB covering up for Baffert. Glad they go caught.
|
|
|
12-11-2021, 01:26 PM
|
#6
|
self medicated
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: toga
Posts: 3,088
|
It’s California jurisdiction. It involves the Santa Anita Derby. Not the Triple Crown
|
|
|
12-11-2021, 01:30 PM
|
#7
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 20,613
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by burnsy
It’s California jurisdiction. It involves the Santa Anita Derby. Not the Triple Crown
|
If you argue he should have been DQ'd from the SA Derby and he subsequently is, then technically he should not have been allowed in the Ky Derby because he didn't have enough points. I'm not a lawyer, but it feels like one mess could open another.
__________________
"Unlearning is the highest form of learning"
|
|
|
12-11-2021, 02:26 PM
|
#8
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Lehigh Valley, PA.
Posts: 7,464
|
The CHRB acted in a way that was totally corrupt and unconscionable. I'd love to see Ruis and the owners clean their clocks.
|
|
|
12-11-2021, 02:40 PM
|
#9
|
self medicated
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: toga
Posts: 3,088
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by classhandicapper
If you argue he should have been DQ'd from the SA Derby and he subsequently is, then technically he should not have been allowed in the Ky Derby because he didn't have enough points. I'm not a lawyer, but it feels like one mess could open another.
|
I highly doubt this judge is allowed to make that stretch. Not saying it would not lead to future filings. But he’s going to rule on the contention at Santa Anita.
|
|
|
12-11-2021, 02:41 PM
|
#10
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 20,613
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by burnsy
I highly doubt this judge is allowed to make that stretch. Not saying it would not lead to future filings. But he gonna rule on the contention at Santa Anita.
|
Right.
I'm talking about potential future problems after this is settled.
__________________
"Unlearning is the highest form of learning"
|
|
|
12-11-2021, 03:27 PM
|
#11
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 5,870
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by classhandicapper
Right.
I'm talking about potential future problems after this is settled.
|
they gonna dock half his stallion fee as punishment?
|
|
|
12-11-2021, 05:15 PM
|
#12
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by classhandicapper
If you argue he should have been DQ'd from the SA Derby and he subsequently is, then technically he should not have been allowed in the Ky Derby because he didn't have enough points. I'm not a lawyer, but it feels like one mess could open another.
|
It likely can't because that sort of eligibility isn't a ground for DQ from the Derby, but OTOH the Triple Crown is a trademark and if they said "you are no longer to refer to Justify as a TC winner", that might stick.
|
|
|
12-11-2021, 05:22 PM
|
#13
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,798
|
Thinking about this more, Churchill might have a viable lawsuit for fraud against Baffert based on his representation that Justify met the eligibility requirements when he didn't. And Churchill could possibly get the purse money back and might even be able to seek a declaratory judgment that Justify was ineligible to run in and did not win the Derby. That could fly if Churchill feels strongly enough about this.
|
|
|
12-11-2021, 05:37 PM
|
#14
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 487
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp
Thinking about this more, Churchill might have a viable lawsuit for fraud against Baffert based on his representation that Justify met the eligibility requirements when he didn't. And Churchill could possibly get the purse money back and might even be able to seek a declaratory judgment that Justify was ineligible to run in and did not win the Derby. That could fly if Churchill feels strongly enough about this.
|
That makes zero logical sense.
As "Churchill" was the entity which allowed Justify to run in the Derby, so they'd be on the liable end.
LOL - talk about self-incrimination.
"Good Magic" would be a fitting match to some of the even-more-recent Derby winners.
Beyond that, when a random person enters a random horse in a race, he may get fined for entering an ineligible horse (though not in this case, because he was apparently "eligible" at the time of entry), but the ultimate burden is on the association to determine that eligibility.
|
|
|
12-11-2021, 05:51 PM
|
#15
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 518
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilanesp
Thinking about this more, Churchill might have a viable lawsuit for fraud against Baffert based on his representation that Justify met the eligibility requirements when he didn't. And Churchill could possibly get the purse money back and might even be able to seek a declaratory judgment that Justify was ineligible to run in and did not win the Derby. That could fly if Churchill feels strongly enough about this.
|
lol no, Justify met the eligibility requirements based on Derby points
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|