As I understand it, since the request to stay the suspension was denied, he is suspended and his suspension will be reciprocal. Could be wrong, but I don’t think so.
Vitale has one entered in Saratoga tomorrow. He was at Laurel for a while then Stronach threw him out but still took his entries.
He won’t be able to run at Saratoga will he?
That is not actually the finding of the court for the imposition for the TRO although I am sure it will ultimately be an argument.
Actually Hollendorfer concentrated on an agreement that the Horseman entered into specifically related to this Del Mar meet. The agreement states that the track will not discriminate in any way against a trainer “by way of any arbitrary and capricious conduct”
The judge felt that Del Mar behaved in any arbitrary and capricious manner – hence the ruling.
BTW, this is the battle and not the war but the other tracks have to be blinking a little right now. Jerry had to show he was more likely than not to win and in the meantime he would be irreperably harmed waiting for his day in court. Now the premise of the whole thing is this specific agreement but I would be surprised if that language wasn’t in every CTT agreement with all of the tracks.
If I am right, Santa Anita needs to tread carefully. They are in a different jurisdiction and it would be an LA Superior Court judge deciding a similar motion if it comes down to it, but if their agreement is the same or similar, I am not sure there are a lot of arguments to make. They needed the cover of the CHRB and they don’t have it.
I’m also not sure that The Stronach Group understood what they stepped in trying to placate PETA et al. A courtroom is not the Twitterverse. It’s a serious place that has serious people in it and consequences if you fail to heed that reality.
The view from the sidelines could get pretty interesting this fall.
2 Likes
I wonder if Stronach may be on the legal side of the fine line, because they kicked him out. Perhaps deeming someone persona non grata is permissible after they’ve been given a chance to race at the venue, but not before hand.
Del Mar refused to let him in, with no reasonable explanation, and that seems to be more problematic, in the legal sense, than is kicking someone out.
I don’t see that the stewards have scratched the horse as of 7 AM this morning. He has Hijacker in the last.
It’s almost ironic that liberal California is forcing Del Mar to let him run until what? Another horse dies?
I have no inside knowledge as to their strategy, but my suspicion is that everything happened towards the end of the meet and they simply weren’t ready. It takes time to get a lawyer, get the lawyer up to speed and write these things. When Los Al welcomed Jerry, he may have decided just to concentrate on Del Mar.
I’m sure the percentages that have been bandied around the internet will make their way into a brief if there is a court challenge in LA. What I am less sure of is whether a court will be as impressed with that evidence as the commenters on the Paulick Report site. After all, Jerry has been plying his trade for 40 years. There were other trainers who lost horses this year including horsemen who lost more than one. The track was closed down for a month trying to get its house in order. A cogent argument could be made that there was deflection and scapegoating going on. In fact, a third party, Los Alamitos, said as much to the press.
Issuing a TRO involves a weighing and balancing process. I imagine that a court could determine that a spate of bad press–all of which was certainly not due to Jerry Hollendorfer-- is outweighed by essentially taking away a man’s livelihood when there has not been a CHRB ruling. Santa Anita is not a regulator. They can’t or shouldn’t simply close their doors to a valid licensee because “we don’t like your kind around here”. The dangers of that should be self evident.
3 Likes
An interesting take on the ruling by the LA Times
https://www.latimes.com/sports/story/2019-07-26/horse-racing-newsletter
It’s their impression that Del Mar wanted to lose because now they have legal cover if something happens.
Also Santa Anita has the same agreement which is in issue as does Golden Gate.
1 Like
That LA Times report is informative. What a mess for all involved.
It this drags on into the fall and winter, and progresses to the point that Hollendorfer takes legal action against Santa Anita, he certainly can make the case that he has suffered substantial harm… financially, and in terms of reputation. And yes… the deflection and scapegoating argument is not hard to substantiate. If Santa Anita does not have a clear and convincing argument and a lot of information not yet known publicly to support their decision… they have indeed stepped in it.
Now would be a very good time to hire “new” management to “reevaluate” the entire situation at Santa Anita, and come up with a “new” plan on how to approach the fall of 2019, and next year. Assuming that the goal is to save the track, and not sell it.
In the mean time, I, at least, sit on the sidelines with my popcorn and nice glass of chardonnay 
I like the last comment in the LA Times article that this entire “mess” will certainly generate billable hours, lots of them.
I feel bad for Jerry that he is the sitting duck having to show up in court and continue to defend his actions. was happy to see that the courts upheld the agreement between CTT and Del Mar and yeah, I figure there will be more rounds of this with different tracks. TSG may ultimately get boxed into a corner in their attempt to say they didn’t like Hollendorfer and didn’t want him or his horses at their tracks.
A mess if you ask me. But sounds like the LA Times hit the nail on the head that Del Mar can fall back on ‘the courts made me do it’ it something happens to one of Jerry’s horses. The unfortunate part is that at some point, something will happen to one of Jerry’s horses… no trainer unless they really don’t run horses in races, is completely injury/breakdown free.
The problem is that the current management owns the track. And they think they’re doing a fine job.
1 Like
There’s a saying about lawyers… “Only a fool hires himself as his own attorney.”
I think one could safely say that this applies to track owners who hire themselves as track managers as well at this point.
Many of us on the East Coast are happy that Stronach has thrown trainers out of their tracks and refused entries. If you are not on the racetrack on a regular basis, you probably don’t know what some trainers are doing and not getting caught. Throwing Hollendorfer out is absolutely is a detriment to running horses that might not be quite right. And trainers who were pushing the medication envelope are backing off. Trainers do not always listen to the vets, and some are under unbelievable pressure from owners. We are now hearing, “I can’t risk running that horse,” and “I can’t risk a positive.” We are grateful Stronach has a backbone and is not afraid to get rid of the bad apples. They have NEVER thrown out anyone who didn’t deserve it. And personally I care way more about dead horses than positive tests.
2 Likes
The Vitale situation is an interesting one, maybe even a sickening one. He has a long list of a reputation running on the east coast from Florida to Saratoga. The man had enough balls to walk up to a vet with an unmarked mystery vial of a substance and requested the vet administer it to his horses.
At the same token, the vets never reported this shady business when the request was made and its all coming out now. Vets at these tracks need to start taking this as seriously as track management is taking it. The vets on site are the only medical opinion working for these equines on the backside. It is their job and their duty as a veterinarian to keep the best interests at the forefront for every equine entrusted to their opinion and care. And I am not saying that every vet is in this boat, not at all. But they all need to operate towards the same goal if there is ever going to be change. that goes for track management as well
As for why Stronachs have offered Vitale stalls while he has been suspended for bad drug violations time and again; I do not know. Perhaps its a “mob” type business deal. Just goes to show that a suspension never truly affects a trainer across the board. He can pack his bags and move to another track and be received with open arms despite his crimes.
I don’t think the words “National Governing Body” can be preached enough.
As for Hollendorfer; I am not surprised he got his stalls back. But at the same time; the reason for banning him in the first place was because of the sheer number of fatalities his barn had over the past meet at SA. The VETS on site combined the CHRB reviewing data were the ones to request this action against him. And while they may be using him as puppet to set an example, the CHRB board and the veterinarians wouldn’t have taken this serious course of action without substantial evidence about the care and soundness of the horses Jerry sent to the track everyday. Those reports and data have never been made public; which from a business perspective I think is rather professional. Lets be honest, banning Jerry from tracks he frequented is a serious financial disservice to everyone his stable of horses employs: Veterinarians, track management, etc. When a trainer has 50+ horses stabled and racing and training everyday; the decision to remove them from the business is not an easy one.
And while racing is a business for many and hobby for most, the one thing that should trump everything is: the care of the horse should be foremost #1. Not just for the horse players but for the integrity of the sport and the safety of the jockeys and the safety of the horses who’s backs this industry rides upon. Those operating without those horse’s best interest in mind, risking horses’ lives, drugging them, etc should be held accountable and removed from the mix regardless of successes and fame. Tracks and overseeing governing bodies need to unite on their policies and stop slapping repeat offenders on the wrist. Clean up the sport and start working in the horse’s favor.
The sad thing about the Hollenforder situation is that if something now happens at Del Mar; then what? Are people going to continue to defend him because he’s “Jerry Hollendorfer”. Then Del Mar has to spend their time and money making public statements and hiring lawyers to speak for them when things go wrong. I hope they don’t. But Rick Porter didn’t yank his horses from Jerrys barn because things were rosey. There is history here and only Rick was willing to open his mouth about it long before the fatality streaks.
I pray nothing goes wrong at Del Mar. But the sport needs to stop playing around with suspensions and slaps on the wrist. Get Governing body together and rule it with an iron fist. Change will not happen until then and without change, further decline in the sport will continue to happen in North America. The sport relys on horse players and the public to survive. Without that; no track is immune from failure. No one wants to go to the track and see horses break down, horses racing who are drugged with unknown substances, horses that are racing that are obviously unsound. And these slaps on the wrist rulings and minimal suspensions for repeat offenders are doing nothing but putting a black eye on the industry
Hijacker (Vitali’s horse) did not run. He is entered for 8/2/19 at Monmouth.
Can you please reference where you saw that onsite veterinarians and CHRG were the ones requesting that Hollendorfer be banned? The action was taken by The Stronach Group (at least for Santa Anita and Golden Gate Fields; Del Mar followed suit of their own volition).
CHRB has, to the best of my knowledge, not taken any action against Jerry during or since the last SA race meet.
Curious to me that you think that reports that contain information about why TSG banned Jerry should remain private. Sounds like even Jerry doesn’t know the details (unless you can cite a source saying Jerry has knowledge of why TSG banned him.
1 Like
Snaffle has no clue as to what is going on in CA. That stuff is simply made up.
1 Like
the veterinarians didn’t request he be banned. that action was taken by the CHRB board and Santa Anita after findings presented by Veterinarians involved with the CHRB board reviewing data. That information has been publicly disclosed in many articles. read them.
