Question for rezlagal?

[FrankD.]

Richard or other legal eagles, ðŸ¦...

This question was brought up on an email string I’m part of.
Could the stewards suspension of Saez and or it’s harshness be the result of legal advice?
IE: To justify their actions per the DQ and pending litigation.....

It was asked but it was vaguely answered on the string by an attorney.

Thanks in advance.

FD

[johnnym]

Interesting Thought.
1) The suspension is total BS
2) After watching the attorneys video there can for sure be a discussion if Tyler had a say in this.
3) If point 2 is valid then DQ is a bad call.
Thus going back to Franks Question.
Interesting
Personally I don’t blame the West’s at all.

[hellersorr]

Churchill Downs has a very strong interest in fighting this as hard as possible, regardless of whether or not the stewards screwed up.

Here\'s just one reason:  Imagine a class-action lawsuit by holders of Maximum Security tickets (WPS and all the different exotics).

If successful in overturning long-established practice, it would be a huge financial blow to Churchill Downs AND could change the industry.  (For instance, no more disqualifications a month or two down the road for use of illegal drugs while NOT reimbursing the bettors.)

[Strike]

hellersorr Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Churchill Downs has a very strong interest in
> fighting this as hard as possible, regardless of
> whether or not the stewards screwed up.
>
> Here\'s just one reason:  Imagine a class-action
> lawsuit by holders of Maximum Security tickets
> (WPS and all the different exotics).
>
> If successful in overturning long-established
> practice, it would be a huge financial blow to
> Churchill Downs AND could change the industry.
> (For instance, no more disqualifications a month
> or two down the road for use of illegal drugs
> while NOT reimbursing the bettors.)

If the stewards NOW FEEL the infraction was so egregious -- why in the hell did they not post an inquiry? I would love to hear their explanation. They all should be given suspensions (whether you agree with the DQ or not -- fact is they didn\'t do their jobs).

[rezlegal]

Putting aside Mr. DeMaria\'s misspelling of my non-trademarked nickname on this sit,I will endeavor to respond in no particular order; 1. Let\'s forget about fantasies of class actions or any other litigation involving bettors. Every state has rules that limit the exposure in such a case to the purse (and trophy), otherwise there would be a class action on behalf of losing bettors involving every administrative or judicial reversal of a disqualification.The betting result is FINAL! 2.With respect to the suspension, only a cynic-meaning everyone on this board or anyone who has ever lost a bet- would believe the stewards consulted with counsel in reaching the decision to suspend Saez.Two of the Stewards- Borden and Becraft are appointed by the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission,which Governmental agency likely has an inside general counsel to consult with. The third steward, Tyler Picklerman (you cannot make this stuff up)works for host track (Churchill Downs),a large publicly traded company with a brand to protect. It should not be a surprise to anyone if counsel were consulted. But I posit the alternate argument.If these stewards disqualified a winner for first time in history--sort of a big deal- how can they not suspend Saez?? Any other outcome would be moronic. Moreover, why should the punishment be different than if this were a maiden claimer or any other stakes race? BUT WAIT-this is the most important part of this email--since this madness has got to stop- I have Saratoga tix in section B row D seats 15-18. I will be up 6 or so different days(and Thursday-Saturday Jim Dandy weekend )-if you produce proof of a losing ticket on MS and demonstrate that you have stopped posting on this subject from today forward either a drink or hot dog and beer is on me.

[rezlegal]

and Strike asked the only relevant question--and they should be held to account.

[johnnym]

Just when I thought I was out,they pull me back in.

[hellersorr]

rezlegal Wrote:

> Let\'s forget about fantasies of class actions or
> any other litigation involving bettors. Every
> state has rules that limit the exposure in such a
> case to the purse (and trophy), otherwise there
> would be a class action on behalf of losing
> bettors involving every administrative or judicial
> reversal of a disqualification.The betting result
> is FINAL!

Counsel for Churchill Downs would be derelict in its duties if it didn\'t consider all possible negative consequences, especially since people can, and do, sue for just about anything.

[Niall]

I\'m in! The Derby Gods have spoken, The West\'s sold their soul in an attempt to win the KY Drby with a trainer who puts up some stats that are outliers in the sport. I genuinely feel bad for them because they invest and racing needs them. As to the inquiry/objection and how it came about, who cares as long as they got it right. They did. Good for Prat for saying something. Who on here hasnt thought a thousand times I hope they look at that!! And don\'t. I\'m going to work on my thirst and look forward to meeting rezlegal, claim my prize and promptly reciprocate.

Oh - hats off to Tom Amoss. I was critical of his running Serengti. Turns out he was completly informative in the days up to the race explaining his rational.

Good luck all.

[Fairmount1]

Counselor,it seems you did not answer the question .  If you did, it was lost on me through some trademark and lawyer verbiage about the upcoming Spa meet that opens early this year.  Does this result in more JB and AB seminars is the key question from this date change?  And what about Uncle Bill\'s itinerary?    

On another note, some may not know this but immediately after the Derby, TWINSPIRES refunded up to 10 dollars worth of win bets on Max Security to its customers (making the small gamblers feel warm and fuzzy I guess?)  So while the betting result was final, Churchill\'s flagship ADW was handing out refunds right away.  Now why would they do that?  Their goal is to make every single penny they possibly can as a publicly traded company (whose stock has been on a quite a ride the last few years for any that are interested including a recent 3 for 1 split).

Not sure how accurate, but heard on ESPN I think that the DQ of Max Security resulted in a 42 million dollar shift in the WPS pools away from his backers.  Anyone else hear this to confirm my recollection is accurate?  

Rez, you mentioned \"beer\"...not \"A\" beer and Not \"a few beers\" but rather you said \"Beer is on me.\"  I think I\'m gonna hold you to your exact offer and this could be one expensive weekend for you.  Bud Light Please.  You might look into InBev stock (BUD) now as a cover.  I\'ll have the ticket in hand if there is any way I can make it.....

[trackjohn]

Rez:

You might be in trouble...you should have placed an \'A\' in front of beer in your email...you didn\'t think that contract law verbiage wasn\'t going to enter this did you? LOL... looking forward to meeting you in person at \'The Spa\'

John

[ajkreider]

He\'s no dummy.  He said, \"From this day forward\", which means that all those who replied to that comment have already disqualified themselves.

Lawyers . . . . .

[trackjohn]

Nice!!

[rezlegal]

“A” extra beer for you AJ!

[T Severini]

rezlegal Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> and Strike asked the only relevant question--and
> they should be held to account.


Take the Pot away from Mott!

and count the returns again

take back all payouts fraudulently got

and pay them to superfecta men!