Legal Opinion

Dugan v. Delaware Harness Racing Commission

Supreme Court of Delaware

Decided May 11, 2000No. 25, 1999PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOLLAND, Justice, for the majority:

This is an appeal from a final judgment of the Superior Court. The Superior Court affirmed a decision by the appellee, Delaware Harness Racing Commission, that sanctioned the appellant, Joseph P. Dugan, for violating its trainer responsibility rules. This is Dugan’s direct appeal.

Dugan argues that the Delaware State Harness Racing Commission committed legal error by sanctioning him on the basis of blood test results that the Commission’s own rules provided would be given effect only if certain procedural safeguards were *530in place. We have concluded that…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States Ex Rel. Accardi v. ShaughnessySupreme Court of the United States · 1954
  2. Morton v. RuizSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  3. United States v. CaceresSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  4. Vitarelli v. SeatonSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
  5. Weisgram v. Marley Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Pollock v. Patuxent Institution Board of ReviewCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2003
  2. Adams v. Delaware Harness Racing CommissionSupreme Court of Delaware · 2010
  3. B.W. Electric, Inc. v. Gilliam-JohnsonSuperior Court of Delaware · 2019
  4. Dugan v. Delaware Harness Racing CommissionSupreme Court of Delaware · 2000
  5. Lemper v. Delaware Board of Dentistry & Dental HygineSuperior Court of Delaware · 2017

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API