New York court to examine legal issues of Forte appeal

A Schenectady County Supreme Court judge in New York has denied a motion from the New York State Gaming Commission seeking to have an appeal made by trainer Todd Pletcher moved to appellate court, in a ruling that will allow the judge to examine several legal issues raised by Pletcher’s legal defense.

The Friday order by Supreme Court Judge Michael Cuevas stated that Pletcher’s attorneys had raised several legal issues that he wanted to examine. The case involves a positive for the finding of the prohibited drug meloxicam after Forte, a horse trained by Pletcher and owned by Mike Repole, won the Hopeful Stakes on Sept. 5, 2022, at Saratoga Racecourse.

Pletcher was given a 10-day suspension for the positive, and Forte was disqualified. Both Pletcher and Repole appealed the decision after a hearing officer upheld the penalties, filing a so-called Article 78 proceeding, which requires a New York state court to review decisions by state agencies. Pletcher’s suspension was stayed as a result of the filing.

:: Get the Inside Track with the FREE DRF Morning Line Email Newsletter. Subscribe now.

In the ruling, Cuevas wrote that he wanted to review the commission’s decision to allow lawyers for owners whose horses finished behind Forte to submit arguments during Pletcher’s appeals hearing because one of the attorneys was not licensed to practice in New York. In addition, Cuevas wrote that several legal arguments advanced by Pletcher’s team, including objections to the rules that were used to determine a violation, deserved a closer examination.

“A reading of the transcript of the hearing clearly demonstrates that the interpretation of the commission’s rules was at issue,” Cuevas wrote. “On the question of vagueness and lack of a zero-tolerance rule, it appears that even the hearing officer was confused.”

The ruling requires attorneys for Pletcher and the commission to appear at a videoconference hearing on May 10 to determine “where there are any issues of fact requiring trial or whether any additional briefing is necessary.”

:: Want to learn more about handicapping and wagering? Check out DRF's Handicapping 101 and Wagering 101 pages.