Horse Racing

Guild Statement of Contempt ‘Failed in face-to-face test’


Via

Defending itself against contempt of court charges for knowingly violating a disputed preliminary order by imposing equestrian offense penalties on Jockeys’ Guild members nationwide, the Authority The Integrity and Safety Act (HISA) countered in federal court Tuesday with a filing that said the plaintiffs’ arguments “failed to be candidly examined.”

At issue is the still-controversial nature of the wording in the July 26 order of the United States District Court (Western District of Louisiana), which states that the HISA rules will apply in the two countries. plaintiff until Sued June 29 was decided in that court, noting that, “The geographic scope of the order shall be limited to the states of Louisiana and West Virginia, as well as to all of the Plaintiffs in this proceeding.”

The plaintiffs – most specifically the Guild – believe that the last line of the judge’s words applies to “all members of the Jockeys’ Guild, regardless of the jurisdiction of the United States in which the person is riding.”

HISA’s defendants assert that individual members of the Association are clearly not plaintiffs in the lawsuit and treat them in a way that “would be devastating to the sport.”

HISA asked the court to clarify the wording, but first appealed the preliminary order to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which resulted in the stay being issued.

It now appears that the filing of that appeal means there will be no clear explanation until the Fifth Circuit Court decides the matter it has been asked to consider, according to a separate order issued by the Court. brought on Tuesday night by the district court.

“Because Defendants filed the Notice of Appeal prior to filing the Motion to Clarify the Preliminary Order, this Court does not have the authority to clarify the Preliminary Claims Order,” district court order dated 9 August stated. “The submission of the notice of appeal grants jurisdiction to the Court of Appeal and assigns it to aspects of the case as it proceeds before the Court of Appeal. Once jurisdiction has been rescinded, this Court may not take any action that would alter the status of the case as it remains before the Court of Appeal. “

On August 2, the plaintiffs, headed by the states of Louisiana, West Virginia, and Guild, asked a federal judge to order immediately to enforce its command to keep Guild member pranksters from being subject to HISA rules across the country.

The plaintiffs also want the judge to ask the HISA defendants to explain to the court why they should not be disregarded for “clearly violating this order of the Court within four days of the Court’s entry”.

HISA’s August 9 filing paints that dispute in a different light.

“The plaintiffs’ act of contempt is not too light,” that’s how the HISA case kicks off.

“For starters, the Fifth Circuit has now kept the preliminary order (PI) essentially unchanged, including that it concerns the riding rules and other safety regulations that form the basis of for Plaintiff’s motion,” the filing continued.

“In any event, until Fifth Street stayed in place, the Agency was in full compliance with the PI Order as written. Indeed, the Agency’s affirmative steps (out of an abundance of caution) to clarify the scope of the restraining order contradict any opinion that the Agency knowingly ignored the Court’s PI Order. “

The HISA filing continues: “The agency was in full compliance with the PI Order even prior to Thursday Tracks stay order. Plaintiff does not argue that the Agency continues to enforce mandatory HISA rules in Louisiana or West Virginia (against anyone), or that the Agency continues to enforce mandatory HISA rules against any Plaintiff who anything (anywhere). And as the Agency has explained, individual members of Plaintiffs’ Jockeys Organization (and ‘association’s plaintiffs’) are not ‘Plaintiffs’ to which the PI Order is expressly restricted.

“There’s good reason the Order doesn’t extend to all of the thousands of individual members of Plaintiffs nationwide: It would turn the Court’s limited preliminary injunction into a sort of nationwide restraining order. which the Supreme Court and the Fifth Court harshly criticized, and it would wreak havoc on horse racing in any racing state. [because some] jockey will be subject to fewer protection rules (or possibly no rules at all), while others will still follow the HISA rules.

“That is unacceptable,” the HISA filing summarizes. “However, the Plaintiffs made no response to those important legal and practical facts.”

In the August 2 petition filed by the plaintiffs, three Guild member charioteers (California-based Drayden Van Dyke, plus Florida-based Edwin Gonzalez and Miguel Vasquez) are accused of being plaintiffs, who purposefully suffered new harm as a result of HISA’s whipping rule, the enforcement of which the Guild claimed was contemptuous of the order.

But HISA’s response on Tuesday indicated that the first two scammers have yet to take advantage of HISA’s process to request a stay pending appeal, and that the third has never even been formally penalized for the violation. violated the whipping that the Association alluded to in its court filings. last week.

The HISA filing states: “Those charioteers were also not specifically harmed for other reasons. “For example, the violations cited against equestrian Drayden Van Dyke (resulting in a 1-day suspension and $250 fine) would violate California’s (pre-HISA) horticulture rules and lead to to an even greater penalty. And not even an adverse verdict was made against driver Miguel Vasquez. “





Source link

news7f

News7F: Update the world's latest breaking news online of the day, breaking news, politics, society today, international mainstream news .Updated news 24/7: Entertainment, Sports...at the World everyday world. Hot news, images, video clips that are updated quickly and reliably

Related Articles

Back to top button