Legal Opinion
Casse v. New York State Racing & Wagering Board
New York Court of Appeals
Decided December 17, 1987PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Hancock, Jr., J.
The "trainer responsibility rule” (9 NYCRR 4043.4) makes *592the trainer of a thoroughbred race horse liable for the impermissible presence of a restricted substance in the horse’s system unless the trainer can show by substantial evidence that he was, in fact, neither personally nor vicariously responsible. The question presented on this appeal is whether the imposition of this "strict responsibility” rule violates due process of law under either the Federal or State Constitution.
After an administrative hearing, respondent, the New York State Racing and…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Armstrong v. ManzoSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Bell v. BursonSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Usery v. Turner Elkhorn Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Tot v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Overstock.com, Inc. v. New York State Department of Taxation & FinanceNew York Court of Appeals · 2013
- Bonacorsa v. Van LindtNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
- MATTER OF MOSHER v. New York State Racing & Wagering Bd.New York Court of Appeals · 1989
- Zito v. New York State Racing & Wagering BoardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- Laterza v. New York State Racing & Wagering BoardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.