Horse Racing Doping Lawsuit Nets $20,000 Settlement for Bettor
An Illinois bettor who missed out on a nearly $32,000 horse racing betting payout due to a horse that tested positive for a banned substance received a $20,000 settlement last month from a lawsuit initiated against the horse’s trainer and owner.
The settlement, which was disclosed today, stems from a lawsuit initiated in 2018 by Jeffrey Tretter with backing from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA).
The lawsuit claimed Jeffrey Tretter was cheated out of $31,835.50 in winnings by the owner and trainer of a horse that tested positive for erythropoietin (EPO).
Missed Opportunity
According to the lawsuit, Mr. Tretter placed several harness racing wagers via TwinSpires.com on a meet held at The Meadowlands on January 15th, 2016.
Among those wagers were win, place, show, exacta, trifecta, superfecta, pick-3 and pick-4 bets in which Mr. Tretter predicted the horses that would finish first, second, third, and fourth place.
Mr. Tretter’s selections ended up finishing in second, third, fourth, and fifth place, however, due to a late surge by Tag Up and Go, a horse trained by Robert Bresnahan and owned by J. L. Sadowsky LLC.
Mr. Tretter later learned Tag Up and Go tested positive for EPO after The Meadowlands tested a blood sample taken prior to the race. The Meadowlands banned Tag Up and Go from racing at its track for six months but never overturned the race result, leaving Mr. Tretter without recourse.
The lawsuit concluded, “but for the illegal entrance of Tag Up and Go into the race, Mr. Tretter would have won in excess of $31,835.50.”
In the end, the defendants settled with Mr. Tretter for $20,000. Mr. Tretter also agreed to donate $7,500 of the settlement to a horse racing adoption fund.
Horse Racing Doping Lawsuit Received Help from PETA
As NJ.com reported in 2018, Mr. Tretter approached PETA for assistance in pursuing the case. PETA agreed to contribute financial and legal support in an effort to combat the illegal drugging of horses.
PETA does not advocate to end horse racing altogether, but the organization does push for an end to drugging.
In a statement issued at the time, PETA Senior VP Kathy Guillermo said this:
“The use of illegal substances and the misuse of legal medications not only harms horses—it amounts to race fixing. This lawsuit is a wake-up call for any trainers who dope horses—they could be sued for racketeering and fraud by bettors who lose money from betting on a race in which a horse is running under the influence.”
Racing officials with knowledge of the case told DRF at the time they had never heard of such a case. Horse racing legal expert Alan Foreman told DRF that he would be surprised if the plaintiff would be able to demonstrate standing to bring suit against the trainer and owner.
David vs. Goliath
According to the Associated Press, one of the lawyers representing Bresnahan described the case as a “David vs. Goliath” situation with PETA able to dedicate significant resources in a case against defendants who are not major figures in horse racing.
“It was rough for us to defend this case on all fronts, because of the amount of money that PETA was pouring into it. It shows they had no evidence of criminal wrongdoing or they wouldn’t have settled so cheaply.”
Does This Open the Floodgates for Similar Lawsuits?
The standard practice in horse racing betting when a winning horse tests positive for a banned substance is to reallocate the purse to other owners. Currently, bettors are not recouped for gambling losses suffered after a winner is later determined to have run under the influence of performance enhancing drugs.
Mr. Tretter’s lawsuit and success in getting a settlement may encourage other bettors to take legal action in cases of sports scandals, whether that be doping in horse racing or sign stealing in baseball.
However, it is worth keeping in mind this case ended by settlement, not by a court’s decision, and therefore does not establish precedence. The lawyer representing one of the defendants made a salient point when noting they faced a powerful opponent in PETA and still managed to settle for “only” $20,000.
As Alan Foreman noted when speaking with DRF in 2018, “it’s only groundbreaking if [PETA] is successful in arguing the case in front of a judge.” Without a ruling in place, it is difficult to predict how a future lawsuit similar to this one would play out if the defendants choose to fight it to a decision.
Wes Burns has more than a decade’s worth of experience as a writer, researcher and analyst in the legal gambling industry and is co-founder of BettingUSA.com. As a former professional online poker player, Wes approaches his work from the viewpoint of players.
