Jennifer Friedman

The appellant appealed a ruling that rendered his horse ineligible to race after making a break in two consecutive races.

The Ontario Racing Commission denied the appeal, finding that ignorance of the rules is not an acceptable defence and that the appellant's reliance on a government official was not clearly established.

The Commission awarded $1,200 in costs to the ORC, deeming the appeal frivolous.

The appellant, a standardbred licensee and trainer, appealed the penalty imposed for a positive test of the Class II drug Lidocaine in his horse.

The Judges had imposed a two-year suspension (with 180 days stayed) and a $5,000 fine.

The appellant argued he relied on veterinary advice after accidentally exposing the horse to a topical spray containing Lidocaine.

The Ontario Racing Commission varied the penalty, extending the stay of the suspension to one year, noting the appellant's reliance on his veterinarian's advice as a mitigating factor, but upheld the $5,000 fine and imposed a two-year probation due to his poor licensing history and inadequate stable practices.

The appellant appealed a ruling that disqualified his horse, Honey Thorn, from a winning race for failing to pay the starting fee 30 minutes prior to post time, as required by Rule 16.11 of the Rules of Standardbred Racing.

The Ontario Racing Commission allowed the appeal, finding that the track failed to notify the Judges of the late payment prior to the race, meaning the rule's penalty provisions were not triggered.

The horse was restored to its original order of finish, and the owner was ordered to pay costs.

The appellant appealed a ruling regarding the cancellation of an Ontario Sires Stakes Gold Elimination race.

The appellant's horse was scratched due to sickness before the elimination race was cancelled due to acts of God.

The Commission dismissed the appeal, holding that only horses properly programmed and ready to race at the time of cancellation are allowed to advance to the final.

The appellant, a standardbred licensee, appealed a ruling that suspended her for three days and placed her horse sixth for causing interference during a race.

The Commission heard testimony from the appellant, another driver, and a senior judge.

Finding the evidence to be a matter of conflicting testimony without conclusive video evidence, the Commissioner deferred to the unanimous judgment of the race judges.

The appeal was denied and the suspension upheld.

The appellant appealed a decision placing his horse on the Judges' Starting List.

The Commission heard testimony and reviewed evidence, concluding that the horse failed to move into the appropriate starting position as required by the Rules of Racing.

Finding no interference, the Commission denied the appeal to protect the public and participants.

The licensee appealed a Director's ruling that suspended his licence, imposed an $8,000 fine, and placed him on probation.

At the hearing, the parties proposed a consent order addressing procedural matters, including disclosure, witness statements, electronic hearings, and the adjournment of remaining motions.

The Panel accepted the proposed consent order, extended the stay of the suspension, and remained seized of the matter.

The appellant appealed a Notice of Proposed Order to Refuse to Issue a Licence as a Standardbred Driver.

The Ontario Racing Commission allowed the appeal in part, setting aside the Director's order and directing the Director to re-examine the application in three months.

The appellant was required to provide updates on his sobriety, resolve outstanding criminal charges and fines, and address allegations of attempting to coerce a witness.

The licensee appealed a one-year suspension and $5,000 fine imposed by the Judges after his trained horse tested positive for the Class II drug Reserpine.

At the hearing, the parties presented a joint submission on disposition.

The Ontario Racing Commission accepted the joint submission, imposing an 8-month suspension (with 3 months stayed), a $3,000 fine, and a two-year probationary period with conditions including random searches and out-of-competition testing.

The appellant, a licensed driver/trainer/owner, appealed a decision finding he used his whip indiscriminately during a race.

He failed to attend the appeal hearing, having left a voicemail the night before attempting to withdraw.

The Commission proceeded in his absence, upheld the violation based on video evidence and his prior admission, and increased his penalty from a 5-day suspension and $500 fine to a 7-day suspension and $1,000 fine due to his history of similar violations.

The Commission also assessed a $1,500 fine for a frivolous appeal, noting his abuse of the due process system.

The appellant, a standardbred licensee, appealed a decision of the Ontario Racing Commission Judges suspending him for three years and fining him $5,000 for fraud, hidden ownership, and other rule violations.

The Commission found that the appellant misled investigators, failed to disclose a prior fraud conviction on his licence applications, and defrauded a horse owner.

The Commission denied the appeal, affirmed the $5,000 fine, and varied the suspension to four years, with eighteen months stayed pending compliance with conditions.

The appellants appealed a decision of the Ontario Racing Commission Judges fining them $17,343.50 each for violating Standardbred Rule 15.09(a) by racing a claimed horse outside of Ontario within 60 days of the claim.

The appellants argued the rule was ambiguous and the officials lacked authority to impose the fine.

The Commission denied the appeal, finding the officials had delegated authority and the penalty policy was clear and appropriate to prevent profiting from rule violations.

However, the Commission reduced the fines to $8,671.75 each due to mitigating factors, including the appellants' good records and the horse's immediate return to Ontario.

The licensee, a jockey, appealed a three-day suspension for interference during a horse race.

The licensee admitted to the interference but appealed the penalty.

The Ontario Racing Commission upheld the three-day suspension, finding it consistent with precedent.

The Commission also found the appeal to be frivolous, as the licensee admitted the offence and offered no new material evidence or mitigating factors, and imposed a $750 fine.

The appellant, a licensed jockey, tested positive for cocaine for a second time within twelve months and was suspended.

He applied for a reinstatement hearing after providing a negative test result.

The Ontario Racing Commission ruled that the appellant would be eligible for reinstatement upon successful completion of his after care program, provided he also submits proof of regular participation in a support group, having a sponsor, and involvement with his church group.

The Administration was authorized to attach further conditions to his license upon reinstatement.

The appellant, a thoroughbred licensee, appealed the Director's decision denying a stay of a 90-day suspension for the horse Hollywood Hit.

The suspension was issued after a positive test for the Class III drug acepromazine.

The appellant argued the stay should be granted until a split sample retest result was available.

The Commission denied the appeal, finding that the positive test triggered an absolute liability offence under the owner responsibility rules, and no exceptional or mitigating factors were demonstrated to justify a stay.

The appellant, a thoroughbred licensee, appealed the Executive Director's denial of a stay of a Stewards' ruling.

The ruling rendered the horse Hollywood Hit ineligible to race in Ontario for 90 days following a positive test for acepromazine.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel denied the appeal, with written reasons to follow.

The appellant, an official clocker, appealed a 30-day suspension imposed by the Stewards for allegedly altering a workout time to make a horse eligible to race.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel found that the appellant corrected a timing error in good faith, consistent with established clocking protocols, and without knowledge of the horse's eligibility requirements.

The panel concluded there was no evidence of an integrity breach or willful wrongdoing.

The appeal was allowed and the suspension rescinded.

The appellant, a licensed veterinarian, appealed an Order of Immediate Suspension and a Notice of Proposed Order suspending his licence for 12 years and imposing a $50,000 fine for prescribing Aranesp (EPO/DPO) to racehorses.

The Ontario Racing Commission found that the appellant breached multiple rules and the Veterinarians Act by prescribing the illegal, non-therapeutic drug without examining the horses or determining if other drugs were being administered.

The Commission denied the appeal but varied the penalty to a 10-year suspension and a $40,000 fine, consistent with the Penalty Guidelines for Equine Drug Offences.

The appellant, a standardbred driver, appealed a $500 fine and three-day suspension for a fourth offence of indiscriminate whip use under Rule 22.22.

The Ontario Racing Commission panel upheld the finding of the rule violation, noting evidence of the whip being used between the horse's legs.

However, the panel found an administrative error in calculating the number of prior offences and varied the penalty to a $500 fine for a third offence.

The appellant, a horse trainer, appealed a ruling that imposed a 6-month suspension, a $3,000 fine, and a two-year probationary period after a horse he trained tested positive for the Class II drug Reserpine.

Following a hearing, the Ontario Racing Commission upheld the rulings but varied the penalties.

The unexpired portion of the suspension was stayed, the fine was reduced to $1,500, and the commencement date for the two-year probation was adjusted.