Breeders' Cup: Hollendorfer vs The Stronarch Group

[cj]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

The judge's ruling in the Del Mar case, which you can find online, has nothing to do with the terms of the Horsemen's contract. It's a straight analysis of whether the power to rule off undesirables extends, under California law, to ruling off an undesirable simply because he causes bad public relations for the track. That was the reason Del Mar argued they could rule him off.

The Court said no- they said the standard is minimal, but there must be some evidence against the undesirable.

Santa Anita has plenty of evidence against the undesirable here, and that's why he is trying to do a backdoor through the BC rather than just going to court and having the Del Mar ruling extended to Santa Anita.

Why wouldn't Santa Anita share the evidence with Del Mar if that was the case?

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by cj

Why wouldn't Santa Anita share the evidence with Del Mar if that was the case?

Del Mar's litigation strategy caused some discussion among legal types in Southern California. They may have actually wanted to win on the argument that they could rule an undesirable off for any reason, even just that he gives the track a bad name.

Having taken that tack and lost, it was too late to come back in and submit evidence.