By: Matt Hassen, Staff Member
Last year, Taryn DeVeau blogged about a decision out of the
Franklin Circuit Court that held instant racing to be a pari-mutuel form of
wagering and thus within the authority of the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission.[1]
Since that decision, instant racing has taken off at Kentucky Downs, the
subject of the original suit. In eleven months, $130 million was bet on instant
racing; average daily purses jumped from $179k to $409k; and handle increased
from $4.3 million last September to $17 million in August.[2]
The Kentucky Court of Appeals, however, vacated the Franklin Circuit Court’s
decision.
Instant Racing consists of a video of a race that was run in
the past. Bettors are allowed to wager on the outcome based on a provided data
set, but the race does not occur at the moment a patron observes it; rather,
they wager on the result of a race that already happened.[3]
Several horse racing organizations originally filed a petition for a declaration
of rights following instant racing regulations adopted by the Racing
Commission.[4]
Subsequently, the Family Foundation intervened, arguing that the regulations
violated Kentucky’s gambling laws.[5] After Family
Foundation intervened, the circuit court denied its request for discovery.[6]
That denial of discovery proved fatal for the circuit
court’s decision. According to the Kentucky Court of Appeals, “the parties had
a right to develop proof and to present evidence to establish that the wagers
made by patrons at electronic gaming machines do or do not meet the definition
of pari-mutuel wagering on a horse race.”[7]
Because of the lack of evidentiary support for its decision, the appellate
court found review of the circuit court’s decision
“impossible” and ordered further proceedings in order to determine such factual
issues as the precise manner in which wagers are pooled and how the odds are
calculated for instant racing wagering.[8]
[1] Taryn
DeVeau, Instant Racing: A Possible
Trifecta for Kentucky, Ky. J. Eq. Ag. & Nat’l
Res. L. Blog, (Oct. 21, 2011) http://www.kjeanrl.com/2011/10/instant-racing-possible-trifecta-for.html.
[2] Janet
Patton, With instant racing, Kentucky
Downs goes from sleepy track to very much alive, Lexington Herald-Leader, (Sept. 2, 2012) http://www.kentucky.com/2012/09/02/2320364/with-instant-racing-kentucky-downs.html.
[3] Family
Trust Found, of Ky., Inc. v. Ky. Horse Racing Comm'n, No.
2011–CA–000164–MR, 2012 WL 2160190, 3, (Ky. Ct. App. 2012).
[4] Id. at 4.
[5] Id.
[6] Id. at 8.
[7] Id. at 9.
[8] Id. at 9-10.
No comments:
Post a Comment