KHRC Requests Federal Court Dismiss Wests' Lawsuit

Claiming Gary and Mary West have no legal claim and only want a court to overturn a stewards' judgment call that disqualified their horse Maximum Security from a win in the Kentucky Derby Presented Woodford Reserve (G1), the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission has filed a motion to dismiss the complaint that was filed in federal court.

The Wests filed a lawsuit May 14 with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky claiming that when stewards disqualified Maximum Security from the apparent Derby victory and the KHRC disallowed an appeal of that decision, it violated their Constitutional rights.

The KHRC responded with a June 8 filing requesting the complaint, which also names the KHRC's individual stewards, its individual commissioners, and its executive director, be dismissed because it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 

"At best the Wests have articulated a mere abstract desire that their horse be declared the winner because he crossed the finish line first," states the 32-page memorandum filed with the motion to dismiss. 

The KHRC argues it's not the job of a court to make a judgment call on the Kentucky Derby winner.

"The Wests disagree with the stewards' call to disqualify Maximum Security. And they disagree with the commission's decision to make that call conclusive," the memorandum said. "Instead the Wests want this court to make the call and determine the winner of the Derby—a demand that threatens to transform the 'most exciting two minutes in sports' into tedious, protracted litigation.

"But their mere disagreement is insufficient to support a claim that their Constitutional—or any other—legal rights have been violated. In fact, they allege no valid cause of action at all. The court should therefore dismiss the Wests' complaint as a matter of law."

The KHRC memorandum said Kentucky law makes it clear that participating in horse racing is a privilege and not a personal right and that no horse may be entered or raced unless the owner has been granted a current license.

"Gary and Mary West own Maximum Security. As horse owners who race in Kentucky, the Wests are licensed by the commission," the memorandum notes. "Thus, the Wests agreed to the commission's regulations and agreed that the stewards' determinations are final."

The memorandum notes the Wests' due process concerns fall short because courts have ruled that one, "can have no legitimate claim of entitlement to a discretionary decision."

The filing also argues the Wests can claim no property interest recognized by Kentucky law because they never were awarded the purse money for winning the Derby.

"... the Wests do not have a protected property interest in the Derby purse simply because Maximum Security crossed the finish line first," the memorandum argues, pointing out that a race is not official until the stewards have declared it as such. 

The KHRC said a Kentucky Court of Appeals has previously reviewed the rule not allowing appeals of stewards' discretionary decisions and it withstood that scrutiny. The KHRC also argues that no Kentucky statute gives the Wests a right to a hearing, final order, or appeal. It further argues that no such process is needed because "no property interest is at stake."