RULING NUMBER COM SB 064/2010
COMMISSION HEARING TORONTO, ONTARIO – DECEMBER 15, 2010
IN THE MATTER OF THE RACING COMMISSION ACT, S.O. 2000, c.20;
AND IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL AND REQUEST FOR HEARING BY DANIEL WAXMAN AND VANDALAY RACING
On May 10, 2006, the Director issued a Notice of Proposed Order to Suspend the licenses of DANIEL WAXMAN (“WAXMAN”) and VANDALAY RACING (“VANDALAY”) for failing to ensure that race horses raced in the name of the bona fide owner pursuant to Rule 11.08 of the Rules of Standardbred Racing.
On May 19, 2006, WAXMAN and VANDALAY filed a Notice of Appeal of the Director’s decision.
On December 15, 2010, a Panel of the Ontario Racing Commission (“ORC”) comprised of Chair Rod Seiling convened for the purpose of hearing the appeal.
Trudy Mauth appeared as Counsel for the Administration of the ORC and David Moore appeared as Counsel for WAXMAN and VANDALAY.
Upon reviewing the Agreed Statement of Facts and upon hearing the joint submissions of Counsel for the Administration of the ORC and Counsel for WAXMAN and VANDALAY, the Panel approves the joint submissions, confirms the conclusion that WAXMAN and VANDALAY failed to ensure the proper separation as required in accordance with Rule 6.13.03 (i) – (v) of the Rules of Standardbred Racing and makes the order as attached hereto.
The transcript from the hearing, the Agreed Statement of Facts and the Order are attached to this Ruling.
DATED at the City of Toronto, this 22nd day of December, 2010.
BY ORDER OF THE COMMISSION
John L. Blakney
Executive Director
ONTARIO RACING COMMISSION
RE: THOROUGHBRED HEARING
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL AND REQUEST FOR HEARING OF DANIEL WAXMAN;
Held Before:
Rod Seiling, Chairman
This is the continuation of a Hearing of the Ontario Racing Commission re: DANIEL WAXMAN, taken before Toronto Court Reporters, Suite 1410, 65 Queen Street West, Toronto, Ontario, at 10 Carlson Court, Suite 400, Toronto, Ontario, on the 15th day of December, 2010.
Appearances:
Trudy Mauth,
counsel for the Ontario Racing Commission Administration
David Moore, counsel for Daniel Waxman
INDEX OF EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT # PAGE #
C. Mauth letter dated November 18, 2010............................. 4
D. Mauth letter dated November 26, 2010............................. 5
E. history and chronology of emails....................................... 4
F. (Reporter's Note: not filed as an exhibit)
G. Agreed statement of facts and attached order................. 22
H. stand alone Order dated December 155, 2010................ 43
Hearing continued ...
MR. CHAIRMAN: All rise. Please be seated. This is the continuation of the hearing that was adjourned in the matter of Daniel Waxman, I think, November 16th was the date. Ms. Mauth, good morning.
MS. MAUTH: Good morning.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Moore, good morning.
MR. MOORE: Good morning, sir.
MS. MAUTH: Sorry.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That's all right.
MS. MAUTH: Mr. Chair, I think on the last date we adjourned proceedings in order to hear word back from the bank. You may recall on the last date Mr. Moore received some communication from a bank I believe in Kentucky and there was some suggestion that perhaps they wished to seek intervenor status in these proceedings. I can tell you, sir, I have not had any contact with the bank at all. All of my information about the bank has come through Mr. Moore and so I understand Mr. Moore is able to provide you with a chronology, a synopsis, of what has transpired between himself and any communications with the bank during that time?
MR. MOORE: Yes, that's right.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. I think before we do that I'd like to - I have had two letters from Ms. Mauth, one dated November 18th and one dated November 26th and I think I would like to get those in the record.
MS. MAUTH: That's fine.
MR. MOORE: That's fine.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, so the November 18th letter will be Exhibit C and the November 26th letter will be Exhibit D.
MS. MAUTH: Thank you.
EXHIBIT NO. C: Mauth letter dated November 18, 2010.
EXHIBIT NO. D: Mauth letter dated November 26, 2010.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, Mr. Moore, back over to you.
MR. MOORE: Thank you. I have a booklet which I've provided to my friend and to the reporter and I would ask it to be entered and marked as Exhibit E. It is the exchange of emails which I won't read every one but I will take you through the chronology in summary form.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Ms. Mauth, you are okay with this?
MS. MAUTH: I am perfectly fine with that.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay. What are we going to call this? History? Satisfied?
MR. MOORE: Yes, that's fine.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So that will be Exhibit E.
EXHIBIT NO. E: history and chronology of emails.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay.
MR. MOORE: And Mr. Kessinger is the Kentucky lawyer for the Fifth Third Bank who contacted me on the morning of the last attendance before you, sir, on November 16th and went through a flurry of emails that morning and that day that I averted to last time I was here and this booklet captures the communications since that time which have kept Mr. Kessinger apprised of the status of these proceedings and have reported to him on what happened on November 16th and again, I