Vaccarezzas' $1M Legal Win Stricken Down by Trial Judge

A $1 million veterinary malpractice action decided in favor of Priscilla and Carlo Vaccarezza by a Los Angeles jury has been set aside by the trial judge.

Los Angeles Superior Court Richard J. Burdge Jr. entered an order late last week granting a Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict, known in legal circles as a JNOV, to defendants Dr. Vince Baker and Equine Medical Center.

The suit centered around Baker's pre-race treatment of Little Alexis , who finished ninth in the 2014 DraftKings Breeders' Cup Filly & Mare Sprint (G1) at Santa Anita Park. She was a 3-year-old at the time and came into the race off running third in the Test Stakes (G1) at Saratoga Race Course and fourth in the Cotillion Stakes (G1) at Parx Racing. Carlo Vaccarezza trained her for Priscilla Vaccarezza Racing.

According to court records, Baker, a practicing Southern California veterinarian, was accused of not properly evaluating Little Alexis for a lump on her jugular vein before the race. Previous reporting by BloodHorse noted her serum amyloid A pre-race blood test was highly elevated with a 2,534 reading, a marker for inflammation and infection. The jury heard evidence that Baker did not inform the Vaccarezzas of the test result before the Breeders' Cup race.

Afterward, she was sick enough that she was unable to be transported to The November Sale at Fasig-Tipton in 2014 as intended. From April through June 2015, she competed in four ungraded races at Gulfstream Park, winning the Barely Even Handicap. She was then sold for $440,000 in November 2015 at Fasig-Tipton.

The jury found that Baker was negligent in failing to use the level of skill, knowledge, and care that other reasonably careful veterinarians would use in the same or similar circumstances and that his negligence was a substantial factor in causing the damages. The verdict came in at $1.06 million, the difference reflecting Little Alexis' appraised 2014 value of $1.5 million and the amount of her sale the following year.

The JNOV is tied to the testimony of Dr. Michael Chavones, a veterinarian licensed in four states but not California, who served as an expert witness for the plaintiffs. He testified that Baker should have informed the Vaccarezzas about the blood test result and that Little Alexis should have been scratched from the Filly & Mare Sprint.

In order to prevail in a veterinary, medical, or legal malpractice case, the plaintiff must establish through competent evidence the pertinent standard of care expected of the professional under the factual circumstances present in the case, prove that the standard of care was violated, and prove that the breach was a substantial factor in causing damages.

In the JNOV order, Burdge wrote at length about what he considers legal deficiencies in Chavones' testimony on direct examination about the standard of care Baker should have observed. Burdge essentially concluded that Chavones' testimony never established the standard of care, only what he would have done under the circumstances.

In California, when a trial judge considers a JNOV motion, all evidence supporting the jury verdict must be presumed true, the judge cannot substitute his own opinion as to witness testimony, and conflicting evidence must be viewed against the losing party. The issue is whether the winning party's evidence constitutes a prima facie case as a matter of law. A prima facie case is one in which legally sufficient facts are proven to justify a favorable verdict.

Applying these principles, a JNOV should be granted only if it appears from the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the winning party, that the case must fail as a matter of law, and that is how Burdge ruled.

According to previous BloodHorse reporting, Baker, the primary defendant, is said to have prescribed the application of Otomax to Medina Spirit 's rump before the 2021 Kentucky Derby. The cream contains betamethasone, which stewards ruled is not permitted on race day when they disqualified Medina Spirit from his win. Baker was also among several veterinarians against whom complaints were filed by the California Veterinary Medical Board late last year.

Burdge's JNOV ruling means the case at the trial court level has concluded, leaving an appeal as the Vaccarezzas' next avenue of relief in the long-running case.

The lawsuit was filed October 2015, saw at least three presiding judges, and was delayed numerous times, including after the occurrences of Hurricane Irma in South Florida, where the Vaccarezzas resided at the time; the shootings at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Broward County, where their two sons were students and not injured; and government restrictions put in place during the COVID-19 pandemic. The case was finally called for trial Feb. 8, 2022, and now it is still yet to be resolved.