Random News about Breeding and Breeders

User avatar
Falinadin
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2017 5:14 am

Thu Feb 14, 2019 9:47 pm

Gemini wrote:
Thu Feb 14, 2019 8:51 pm
Sparrow Castle wrote:
Wed Feb 13, 2019 6:33 pm
Hagyard Partner, Dr. Luke H. Fallon, Issues Statement on Radiograph Lawsuit
The following is a statement from Hagyard Equine Medical Institute partner, Luke H. Fallon, DVM, in response to a lawsuit filed Feb. 7 in the Fayette Circuit Court alleging Hagyard has been falsifying the dates that radiographs were taken on some horses about to be sold at Keeneland since 2006.

The lawsuit filed on February 7 in Fayette Circuit Court regarding several Hagyard Equine Medical Institute veterinarians is without merit. All of us at Hagyard are disappointed by the claims made by Tom Swearingen.
More: http://www.thoroughbreddailynews.com/ha ... ph-lawsuit
I honestly don't know much about the whole situation but unless Tom Swearingen and others are completely insane, there had to be *some* basis for the allegations... I guess?
What's going to be really difficult for them is proving damages. They'd have to prove that a horse had an issue that would have been found if the radiographs had been taken during the correct time period. eg, we bought this horse for $100k based on clean rads taken on X date, but it turns out the date was falsified. If the rads had been taken on the actual date then the value would have been $50k due to the bone chip/OCD lesion etc that the horse developed between the true and false dates. That proves $50k in damages.
I honestly don't know how they plan to do that, because you can't really take an orthopedic problem found after purchase and exactly pinpoint the date it happened on, so you can't really prove that it happened between the actual and falsified radiograph dates.
But they've filed the suit, so.... maybe?
User avatar
Sparrow Castle
Posts: 5594
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 6:44 pm

Thu Feb 14, 2019 11:28 pm

As far as these kinds of damages, I think only buyers who had their vets take radiographs right after the sale would be in a position to claim monetary damages if findings differed significantly from those in the repository.

Regardless, the legal liability of the consignors and others named in the suit could be pretty severe. The Paulick article reports:
The suit charges Hagyard, Hore, Hunt, Rodgerson, Spirito, and the John Does of fraudulent inducement and/or fraudulent misrepresentation; John Does with breach of express warranty; all defendants with civil conspiracy; Dean Dorton of aiding and abetting civil conspiracy, as well as aiding and abetting fraud; Dean Dorton and Hagyard are also charged with negligence.
If the radiographs were taken just outside the required dates, I'm just not sure that's grounds for damages based on the quality of the horse. I posted the article above (http://www.thoroughbreddailynews.com/sa ... -to-agree/) because I see it as a question of do these exams really predict a horse's racing ability.

But some buyers are dissuaded by issues that others might be okay with, especially for the big money horses. Buyers do have the right to accurate information and should be able to rely on it. If the dates on the radiographs were deliberately changed, that's where the issues get serious in my mind. And it looks like nobody is disputing that those dates were falsified. The question for the legal system is does breaking the rules here merit any kind of punishment.

Even if the suit is successful I agree with you, Falinadin, attributing monetary damages could be problematic. I guess that's why the amount of Swearingen's damages are unspecified in the suit.
lurkey mclurker
Posts: 2440
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 8:15 pm

Thu Feb 14, 2019 11:36 pm

What I just don't get is, basically, they admitted that the dates were wrong and they knew they were wrong. So then how can you say claiming that dates were false is "without merit"...?

I mean the suit itself seems like a pretty messy Gordian knot, but the underlying facts of the case haven't really been disputed as far as I've seen? :?
User avatar
Falinadin
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2017 5:14 am

Fri Feb 15, 2019 2:56 am

lurkey mclurker wrote:
Thu Feb 14, 2019 11:36 pm
What I just don't get is, basically, they admitted that the dates were wrong and they knew they were wrong. So then how can you say claiming that dates were false is "without merit"...?

I mean the suit itself seems like a pretty messy Gordian knot, but the underlying facts of the case haven't really been disputed as far as I've seen? :?
I think they are saying that the lawsuit is "without merit" because nobody has (to our knowledge) been able to prove that it hurt anything. It very well could have, but proving it is difficult.
Them getting charged by law enforcement for criminal acts is separate from the lawsuit. They have admitted guilt for breaking laws, but they do not believe that there are grounds for the suit.

If I recall correctly, I think radiographs for sales like Keeneland September have to be taken within 3 weeks of the sale. It is completely possible for a horse to have a good set of rads, then develop a problem in those 3 weeks, which the owner finds after purchase. If the vet had shot them 3 1/2 weeks ago but dated it for 3 weeks, it doesn't actually change anything because either way the horse's problem would have occurred after they were taken. If the horse hurt itself at 3 weeks 1 day though, then you have a problem: if the rads were taken during the correct period they would have shown the problem, but they weren't, so they didn't. That is the only situation I can think of in which there are damages. And being able to retroactively prove that an injury happened within a short window is difficult.
User avatar
Sparrow Castle
Posts: 5594
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 6:44 pm

Fri Feb 15, 2019 5:01 pm

‘Deja Vu All Over Again’; TOBA Drops Ball On Sales Integrity Website
Oops. They did it again.

In August 2014, I discovered that the website formerly devoted to the Sales Integrity Program, an initiative designed to protect Thoroughbred buyers at public auction, was deactivated and the URL address had been purchased by someone who was apparently in the business of domain squatting for profit.

Shortly after the article was published, I got a call from Dan Metzger, the president of the Thoroughbred Owners and Breeders Association, which oversees (and I use that term loosely) the Sales Integrity Program. He was not happy about the article and said TOBA would restore the website once it paid a fee to buy back the domain name from whoever had purchased it and was squatting.

That was then. This is now.

In the wake of the class action lawsuit filed recently against a Lexington veterinary hospital over the misdating of radiographs of sales horses, I was curious about whether the Sales Integrity Program covered the subject.
More: https://www.paulickreport.com/news/ray- ... ite-again/
lurkey mclurker
Posts: 2440
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 8:15 pm

Fri Feb 15, 2019 8:27 pm

Falinadin wrote:
Fri Feb 15, 2019 2:56 am
lurkey mclurker wrote:
Thu Feb 14, 2019 11:36 pm
What I just don't get is, basically, they admitted that the dates were wrong and they knew they were wrong. So then how can you say claiming that dates were false is "without merit"...?

I mean the suit itself seems like a pretty messy Gordian knot, but the underlying facts of the case haven't really been disputed as far as I've seen? :?
I think they are saying that the lawsuit is "without merit" because nobody has (to our knowledge) been able to prove that it hurt anything. It very well could have, but proving it is difficult.
Them getting charged by law enforcement for criminal acts is separate from the lawsuit. They have admitted guilt for breaking laws, but they do not believe that there are grounds for the suit.

If I recall correctly, I think radiographs for sales like Keeneland September have to be taken within 3 weeks of the sale. It is completely possible for a horse to have a good set of rads, then develop a problem in those 3 weeks, which the owner finds after purchase. If the vet had shot them 3 1/2 weeks ago but dated it for 3 weeks, it doesn't actually change anything because either way the horse's problem would have occurred after they were taken. If the horse hurt itself at 3 weeks 1 day though, then you have a problem: if the rads were taken during the correct period they would have shown the problem, but they weren't, so they didn't. That is the only situation I can think of in which there are damages. And being able to retroactively prove that an injury happened within a short window is difficult.
Ah, gotcha. Thanks for the explanation - I got stuck in the idea of fraud and forgot to separate criminal vs civil. :-p
User avatar
Sparrow Castle
Posts: 5594
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 6:44 pm

Tue Feb 26, 2019 4:33 pm

Hill 'n' Dale Sues Rood & Riddle Over Death of Foal
Hill 'n' Dale Equine Holdings has filed a lawsuit in Fayette (Ky.) Circuit Court charging Rood & Riddle Equine Hospital with malpractice in the death of a Curlin —Supercharger foal that died March 9, 2017, approximately 12 hours after birth at the equine clinic.

John Sikura's Hill 'n' Dale Farms is one of the most prestigious breeding operations in the United States, while Rood & Riddle is one of the most prominent equine veterinary hospitals in the country. Both are located in the Lexington area.

Supercharger (A.P. Indy—Get Lucky, by Mr. Prospector), whom Sikura purchased privately, is the dam of Kentucky Derby Presented by Yum! Brands (G1) winner and millionaire Super Saver as well as graded stakes winners Brethren and Cyrus Alexander. Supercharger is the product of several generations of Phipps family breeding and descends from the great broodmare La Troienne, who is her eighth dam.

Because Supercharger previously had a dystocia (imperfectly positioned in the womb) foal at Hill 'n' Dale in 2016 that subsequently died after being moved to Rood & Riddle, Sikura decided to send Supercharger to Rood & Riddle a week before her foaling date in 2017 as a precaution.
More: https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing ... th-of-foal
lurkey mclurker
Posts: 2440
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 8:15 pm

Wed Feb 27, 2019 1:17 am

I'm not making any statement on the merits of the case, or lack thereof... but oh, that poor baby. :( :( :(
User avatar
Falinadin
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2017 5:14 am

Wed Feb 27, 2019 11:30 am

I think that case is a tough one. It's fairly standard to anesthetize a mare and manually pull the foal in a dystocia, because then she's not pushing against you and you can go to c section asap if needed. Also, rib fractures are actually pretty common and the vast majority of the time do not cause death.

That being said, I agree that the foal's vitals should have been checked more frequently than every 4 hours, with that kind of birth and the value of the foal it should have been checked at least every 2 hours, imo. Also, when the foal's heart rate and resp rate starting increasing and it felt uncomfortable, it probably could have used a more thorough evaluation than an enema. Constipation is generally the most likely cause of colic signs in a brand-new foal, but the article said that the foal had been pooping all night. If they had ultrasounded the foal's belly to evaluate for colic, they might have found the blood in the chest.

So I kinda think that the foal getting the broken ribs isn't really the clinics fault. Not catching the bleeding, maybe.
User avatar
Sparrow Castle
Posts: 5594
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 6:44 pm

Thu Feb 28, 2019 12:55 am

Yup...

Hagyard, Veterinarians Ask for Dismissal of Lawsuit
Hagyard-Davidson-McGee Associates and four of its vet partners named in a lawsuit that claims a buyer at the Keeneland sales was harmed by the vets falsifying dates on radiographs to meet sale deadline requirements have asked that the suit be dismissed because the plaintiff has failed to show damages.

In three Feb. 25 filings with Fayette (Ky.) Circuit Court, Hagyard-Davidson-McGee Associates and vets Michael T. Hore, Dwayne Rodgerson, Michael Spirito, and Robert J. Hunt called for the lawsuit filed Feb. 7 by Illinois-based owner-trainer Tom Swearingen be dismissed because the plaintiff has failed to show anything more than "abstract and hypothetical damages."
More: https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing ... of-lawsuit
User avatar
Sparrow Castle
Posts: 5594
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 6:44 pm

Fri Mar 08, 2019 1:35 am

Spendthrift Launches “Safe Bet” Breeding Program
B. Wayne Hughes’s Spendthrift Farm has unveiled a new breeder incentive program to help support the nursery’s fourth-year stallions. Under the Safe Bet program, breeders are assured that a stallion’s first crop of 2-year-olds will have at least one graded/group stakes winner in 2019 or the breeder will be completely relieved of the stud fee for the impending foal in 2020.

“It’s no secret that Mr. Hughes is constantly thinking of ways we can offer breeder-friendly programs for our stallions,” said Spendthrift General Manager Ned Toffey. “The inspiration behind the Safe Bet program largely came from the success of our leading first-crop sires last year, particularly the great things accomplished by Cross Traffic and Goldencents. Breeding to a fourth-year stallion requires making a bet on the early success of the stallion’s first runners. It can be very rewarding–as we saw last year–and there’s also risk involved. We wanted to remove as much risk for the breeders as possible.”
More: http://www.thoroughbreddailynews.com/sp ... g-program/
Post Reply