Federal Judge Dismisses New Mexico Horsemen’s Association Complaint Against Tracks

[Wandering Eyes]

A federal judge in New Mexico has dismissed a first amended complaint stemming from a lawsuit initiated one year ago in which the New Mexico Horsemen's Association (NMHA) sued SunRay Park, Albuquerque Downs and Ruidoso Downs for injunctive relief and damages over alleged violations of the Interstate Horseracing Act (IHA).

“In sum, NMHA fails to state plausible claims for relief under the IHA's consent provisions,” stated the Mar. 5 opinion and order out of the United States District Court for New Mexico.

“NMHA has not established itself as the relevant horsemen's group as defined by [federal statute] §3002(12),” the opinion stated. “Further, the [complaint] contains no allegations that any of the Racetracks accepted an illegal interstate off-track wager. To the extent the IHA may permit civil actions for violations of the regular contractual [process] NMHA does not allege any facts establishing that it engaged in such a process with the Racetracks, much less an abandonment of that process. Accordingly, the Court grants the Racetracks' request to dismiss NMHA's enforcement claims.”

The opinion stated the sequence of events that led to the lawsuit.

“In early 2024, NMHA sent draft consent agreements to the Racetracks in an effort to negotiate NMHA's role in the 2024 race season. The Racetracks declined to execute those contracts and continue in their refusal to deal with NMHA. Despite this ongoing dispute, and lacking an agreement with NMHA, Ruidoso Downs conducted its 2024 race meet and simulcasted races for off-track wagering outside the state.

“The Racetracks took further action against NMHA in the wake of the contract dispute. SunRay and Ruidoso Downs banned NMHA's board of directors from their facilities. Albuquerque Downs began refusing NMHA directors stalls for their race horses. Albuquerque Downs and Ruidoso Downs also started requiring racehorse trainers who participate in race meets to enter agreements appointing the tracks' own horsemen's groups as their representatives in the requisite off-track wagering process. The agreements state that the local horsemen's groups are responsible for negotiating horseracing contracts with Albuquerque Downs and Ruidoso Downs. If trainers refuse to sign, they are excluded from racing or obtaining stalls for their horses,” the opinion stated.

“The fallout spurred the present litigation. NMHA first sued SunRay and sought a temporary restraining order, which the Court denied. SunRay responded with its own counterclaims and sought equitable relief and damages. Ruidoso Downs and Albuquerque Downs intervened, and filed their own third-party complaint [and] the Racetracks moved to dismiss,” the opinion stated.

The NMHA, in the complaint, had advanced four claims for relief under the IHA:

1) A declaration that the racetracks must have a written agreement with NMHA before consenting to off-track wagering, and if an agreement is not reached, that the racetracks may not simulcast their races or enter simulcast agreements with any entity.

2) An injunction requiring the racetracks to negotiate and enter an agreement with NMHA as required under the IHA, and if no agreement is reached, that the racetracks be enjoined from simulcasting their races.

3) To preclude the racetracks from requiring owners, trainers, or NMHA members and directors to sign contracts compelling the relevant party “to appoint any other group as the horseman's representative as a condition of entering racetrack grounds, using a racetrack stall, or participating in racing.”

4) That the racetracks be enjoined from excluding or banishing NMHA directors, officers, or members from their respective facilities.

The judge wrote that, “to plausibly allege that it was the horsemen's group under the IHA, NMHA must state in the [complaint] that it represented the majority of owners and trainers at the Racetracks on particular race days when races were offered for interstate off-track wagering.

“NMHA fails to do so,” the opinion continued. “The [complaint's] allegations regarding NMHA's status as the horsemen's group are all framed broadly.

“For instance, NMHA states that it has represented horsemen in New Mexico since 1966 and is the largest advocacy group for racehorse owners and trainers in the state,” the judge wrote. “NMHA further alleges that a New Mexico state court recognized it as the largest New Mexico horsemen's group in 2023. These allegations, without more, do not establish that NMHA represented the majority of owners and trainers at any of the Racetracks on any race day; the [complaint] contains no allegations relating to specific races offered for interstate off-track wagering by the Racetracks.

“Moreover, the [complaint] alleges that Ruidoso Downs and Albuquerque Downs now condition owners and trainers' participation in their race meets on the execution of contracts appointing local 'stalking-horses' groups as the horsemen's groups for given races. Functionally, these allegations and the related contracts establish the existence of alternative, unanimously appointed horsemen's groups at Ruidoso Downs and Albuquerque Downs for all race days,” the opinion stated.

“A unanimously appointed horsemen's group at a track on a particular race day is the horsemen's group under the IHA, not a rival entity with statewide majority representation,” the opinion continued. “NMHA has alleged that it is the latter, not the former. Accordingly, the [complaint's] enforcement claims must be dismissed because NMHA has not established itself as the horsemen's group for purposes of this dispute.”

The post Federal Judge Dismisses New Mexico Horsemen’s Association Complaint Against Tracks appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

View the full article