Equine Practitioners Ass'n, Inc. v. New York State Racing & Wagering Bd.

488 N.E.2d 831, 66 N.Y.2d 786, 497 N.Y.S.2d 901, 1985 N.Y. LEXIS 17927
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedNovember 12, 1985
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 488 N.E.2d 831 (Equine Practitioners Ass'n, Inc. v. New York State Racing & Wagering Bd.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Equine Practitioners Ass'n, Inc. v. New York State Racing & Wagering Bd., 488 N.E.2d 831, 66 N.Y.2d 786, 497 N.Y.S.2d 901, 1985 N.Y. LEXIS 17927 (N.Y. 1985).

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be modified, without costs, in accordance with the memorandum herein, and, as so modified, affirmed.

We reject plaintiffs challenge to the rules promulgated by defendant which govern the substances which may be administered to a horse within various time periods preceding a race. We agree with the Appellate Division, for the reasons stated in the opinion of Justice Sidney Asch (105 AD2d 215), that these rules are rationally related to, and authorized by, the statutory provisions they implement, and thus we affirm the declaration as to their validity. We do not reach plaintiffs challenge to those rules which authorize warrantless searches of all licensees anywhere on racetrack premises. In view of the concession by defendant that these rules do not apply to licensed veterinarians, who are exempt from the proscriptions which such searches are intended to enforce, plaintiff lacks standing to challenge, on the merits, the rules authorizing warrantless searches. Accordingly, we modify the order of the Appellate Division by deleting the declaration insofar as it relates to the rules as to warrantless searches.

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Jasen, Meyer, Kaye and Titone concur; Judges Simons and Alexander taking no part.

Order modified, without costs, in accordance with the memorandum herein and, as so modified, affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Ford v. New York State Racing & Wagering Board
107 A.D.3d 1071 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
Pedersen v. Racing
46 A.D.3d 1072 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Saratoga County Chamber of Commerce, Inc. v. Pataki
798 N.E.2d 1047 (New York Court of Appeals, 2003)
Zito v. New York State Racing & Wagering Board
300 A.D.2d 805 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Anobile v. Pelligrino
284 F.3d 104 (Second Circuit, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
488 N.E.2d 831, 66 N.Y.2d 786, 497 N.Y.S.2d 901, 1985 N.Y. LEXIS 17927, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/equine-practitioners-assn-inc-v-new-york-state-racing-wagering-bd-ny-1985.